Talk:Yaksha kingdom

India: History Low‑importance

	India portal This 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.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Hinduism

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merge with Yaksha?

This article consists entirely of citations from the Mahabharata without any accompanying academic sources or discussion. I think it makes more sense to mention on the main Yaksha page that they are sometimes identified with real tribal people at the margins of Vedic society and include some of these references as a discussion of the topic in classical literature. It doesn't make much sense to have content split between two articles when there is so little material regarding the idea of yakshas as a real tribal people vs. literary and mythological references. --Spasemunki (talk) 23:12, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree Article has its own importance it could be easily understood like British and British Raj. Manupriy Ahluwalia (talk) 14:17, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge the topics are different enough. Not sure the title is the best choice though. Johnbod (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

6 months & no support - I'm closing this merge proposal down & removing tags. Johnbod (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Yaksha reproposal

Because of the lack of secondary/tertiary sources on the Yaksha kingdom specifically, this article is solely reliant on the Mahabharata to source it. I think it would be better fitting to have this article as a section of the Yaksha article. It should be shortened before making any transition to that article though, since its pretty long for an article with one source. Although this article is important, stylistically and in terms of sourcing a merger with the Yaksha article would better suit the material in this article since there's minimal secondary/tertiary sources for this topic. Condensing it to a section of the Yaksha article would better suit this material, unless someone can find some reliable secondary/tertiary source material on this subject. --Jacquesparker0 (talk) 23:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yaksha Relevance

The maintanance template comments on the published article describe this topic, and therefore the Mahabharat itself, as being part of "a work or element of fiction in a primarily in-universe style. (November 2010)". This is a phenomenal insult to Hindic culture. The Mahabharat has profound religious and cultural importance. To describe it the way it has been is, quite simply, culturally insensitive. Please amend this immediately. Zhanand (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]