India: Karnataka / Literature B‑class

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 B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Karnataka. This article is supported by the Indian literature workgroup.

Image:Sarvajna Manauscipts.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"His contributions to treatises on music include Nija Dipika Ratna, Anubhava Rasayana, Bhakti Marga Sarovara and Gnana Sarovara, both with eighty six compositions, and a host of sangatya, gadya, vachana compositions and eighteen philosophical compositions in the work Shalyada Arasinavara Tikina Kirtane."

I'm not sure exactly what this means - what two compositions does "both" refer to? I've left it as is for now, because I don't want to change the intended meaning. Damanmundine1 11:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iwill refer to my book and make sure I did not alter the intended meaning.thanksDineshkannambadi 13:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are in the middle of a FAR on Kingdom of Mysore, in which one of the issues being discussed is the page name "Kingdom of Mysore" and whether it is appropriate. This page name includes "Kingdom of Mysore" as an integral part; furthermore, it is the mother article of a section in the Kingdom of Mysore page. You cannot simply change the name without informing anyone on this talk page, and, to boot, check the "minor edit" box in the edit notes. This is a very controversial move and it has to be done through the proper channels. Before you can even attempt to do that though, you need to conduct a discussion on this talk and provide your reasons for requesting this move. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 21:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If a larger set of writers are to be included, you nonetheless need to tell us who they are, how much content will their inclusion add, but most importantly why does the page name need to be changed now, when for many many months you have used artifices like naming (long) sections, "Contemporary developments and then including material that did not contemporaneously originate within the realm of the Kingdom of Mysore. Why do we need this change now, when we didn't need it earlier? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:06, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read the article and enjoy it. As the author of the article, I dont see what the problem is in changing the name to what I feel is appropriate at any point in time. If the PR or FAC reviewers dont like it, I will change it to what they feel is correct. Is there a wiki rule that the entire sub-article, line to line, should include only info on Mysore kingdom? I think not. I wanted to expand it, so I did it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since I am disputing the page name change, you need to do it through the proper channels of a "controversial move." As simple as that. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing controversial here. The article includes literature from outside Mysore too.. and it would be incorrect to name it to suggest otherwise. The new title, if anything, is a more accurate description of the content of the article. Sarvagnya 22:20, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a question with the FAR directors since your first revert was based on the FAR. I will go by their advice. If you continue to protest and change the name back, for no good reason, then we can bring in admins.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking the FAR directors. I do protest the change without any prior discussion on the talk page. Since I subscribe to 1RR, I will, however, not revert user:Sarvagyna's revert move. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:27, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)What I am suggesting is not that the sub-article's name "remain frozen," but rather that when such a name change involves issues related to the FAR (and explicitly discussed in My concerns (#5)), it should be discussed on the talk page first. The page move certainly shouldn't be made without any explanation anywhere and with the "minor edit" box checked. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The subarticle's name has changed now in the FAR article, in the name of accuracy and improvements that a FAR is all about.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what is at stake here. The page name needs to be changed back to Kannada literature in the Kingdom of Mysore. One of the points of the FAR (My concerns#5) has been that both the literature section and the mother article have never been about Kannada literature within the Kingdom of Mysore, and that among other things they have included non-Kingdom-of-Mysore literature through the artifice of sections like Contemporary developments, which describe the Kannada literature of surrounding kingdoms. You need to explain why you are doing this now and why these latest changes cannot be accommodated in more "Contemporary developments." Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:58, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is you who needs to explain why you linked one of your issues to a sub-article, when the FAR is about the main article. Sub-articles are meant to be expanded and that is what I did. I dont need to explain anything. I have made 27,000 edits on wiki, did I explain them all to you?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]