Talk:Ugabhoga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject India / Music (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Indian music workgroup (marked as Mid-importance).
 
Note icon
This article was last assessed in March 2012.

Spelling[edit]

Need to add spelling in Tamil, Kannada, Telugu, and Malayalam. Badagnani (talk) 05:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Factual errors[edit]

Viruthams have existed for thousands of years, like slokams. They're like a raga alapana, but are lyrical by nature. Some Tevarams are sung as Viruthams, as are certain other forms...such as Ugabhoga. Ugabhogas are devotional by nature, much like the other forms, so it doesn't even belong in the CM article. Purandaradasar did NOT introduce the Ughabhoga - it was introduced by the Haridasa movement. The concept of virutham wasn't introduced by Papanasam Sivan - it existed thousands of years ago. Papanasam Sivan merely composed more, much like composers prior to his existence, including Gopalakrishna Bharathi, Muthu Thandavar and Arunachala Kavi. Factual errors need to be removed in due course, as the citations given are not reliable to make such statements, and the website provided as a source doesn't even state what has been stated int his article, so as such is a misrepresentation and synthesis of material. And btw, Ughabhogas are NOT integral to a concert. In fact, you can handpick which concerts actually have had ughabhogas sung in them. Ncmvocalist (talk) 07:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


If you have sources, please fix the article and present the sources. Badagnani (talk) 06:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


NO ERRORS: Before Sri Purandara Daasa (Sri PD) founded CM all know that there were free style singing such as slokas etc in all Indian languages. What Sri PD did with innovativeness was to incorporate it scientifically into a Krithi of CM with raga format. It is known among music scholars as Ugabhoga. Sri PD is the leading innovator/composer/writer of Haridasa movement. Credit goes to Sri Papanasam Sivan for make it popular in Tamil Language for current day CM. Again there is no need to dilute the article with pre-historical information. Let us keep this article focused and lead readers to accurate information. All references quoted are relevant and web sites are authentic. For one who did not attend a CM concert with Ugabogha is requested to watch concerts posted on web and listen to CD by many artists to learn that Ugabhoga is a part of CM.Naadapriya (talk) 16:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

It is known among scholars as Virutham, which has a tradition that is much older than when created by Purandaradasar. And btw, Ughabhoga is not a krithi. Papanasam Sivan did not make it popular in Tamil language - it was already made popular well before hand by Gopalakrishna Bharathi and other composers I've mentioned abvoe. The misrepresentations will be corrected in due course. I have enough concert lists by prominent artists to confirm the fact that most of the information provided her is POV. Also, referencing does not meet RS requirements. Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

With all the discussions that took place so far everyone should know by this time that present day Karnataka Music (CM) did not exist before Sri PD founded it in thc early part 15th century CE. Again credit goes to Sri PD for incorporating 'Ughabogha' in Krithi of CM. No one stated Ughabhoga is a Krithi. Instead of misinterpreting and stalling the progress with unrelated comments, it is requested to read the article carefully and understand it is a part of Krithi just like alapane which came later. Having personal concert list should not matter much since 'prominent artist' can be POV and subjective. Information posted in the article is based on reputed news paper, archived recordings of Radio station hosted by a reputed Universitity and book with ISBN number. Again it need to be noted that information posted here is not for popularity contest. It is the statement of facts. Also documented information about concerts exists only since after about 1900s. Therefore Sri PS is identified as the lead contributor using Tamil language. If something similar existed one can include in the article with authentic references without trying to reconstruct history like 'Monday Morning Quarterbacking' Naadapriya (talk) 08:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
It isn't POV or subjective when the evidence is damning that ugabogus is not integral to Carnatic music. The sources currently cited are blatantly unreliable. If the editor who created this article refuses to fix the inaccuracies, and to cooperate with the broader Wikipedia community in removing POV statements, particularly when reliable sources are added in due course by myself among other editors, the editor will be subject to a review by the relevant authorities. Ncmvocalist (talk) 10:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Instead of engaging in constructive discussions, if you continue to threaten users as has been your habit, you will be the one who will be reported. So, get a grip on yourself and stop your threats. -- ¿Amar៛Talk to me/My edits 15:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for quick constructive inputs[edit]

Thanks to Badagnani, KNM, Sarvagnya and Utcursch for making this article (important for Carnatic Music) read lot better in such a short time. Naadapriya (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks also to Dineshkannambadi who directed to an important reference during discussions.Naadapriya (talk) 16:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

"Freestyle"/"free style"[edit]

If it's a kriti (composition), how can it be "freestyle" or "free style"? In English, "freestyle" usually means "improvised." Can this be clarified so that there is no ambiguity in the article? Badagnani (talk) 06:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Disruptive editing[edit]

In recent edits important citation based on a reputed newspaper, Hindu [1] is deleted by User:Ncmvocalist without discussions. Naadapriya (talk) 08:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

  1. It was deemed unreliable in the context in which it was used.
  2. You are topic-banned (you were notified on your talk page) - you may not edit on these pages. Please cease or you will be prevented from doing so. Ncmvocalist (talk) 16:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Is a scholarly report from highly reputed news paper Hindu, unreliable????
The text in Wikipedia articles are not just a 'cut&paste' type reproduction of the information from sources. Please read Do not copy sources[2]. It is a summary with reference to sources and other existing wikipedia articles. For e.g. you introduced word 'suladi' from ref which has no mention till today in CM article. It makes lead poorly understandable. One needs exercise judgment what to use from the source in the context of the article. Please stop disruptive editing. Naadapriya (talk) 22:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
  1. Merely being a reputed newspaper does not make it reliable in all contexts - this is one of them in the way it was used in this article.
  2. You need to stop misrepresenting sources. The only real source that's in this article, which is in the lead, has no mention of Carnatic music with Ugabhoga, as was pointed out repeatedly during the Article RFC - instead, it's compared only to "Suladis" and "Kirtanes", a form of literature that is no longer in the vogue.
  3. Continuing to edit on these pages despite being warned is not a good sign of things to come. Ncmvocalist (talk) 03:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


Pending changes[edit]

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:27, 17 June 2010 (UTC).