Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:35, 7 March 2016

Literature Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: Literature Start‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian literature workgroup (assessed as Top-importance). This article has been flagged for a reassessment of its current rating.

Arjuna and the Hunter

Kirātārjunīya by Bharavi has already been translated by Carl Cappeller in 1912 as Volume 15 of the Harvard Oriental Series. Solomon7968 10:12, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Petition 2016

@Kautilya3, why are you reverting sourced material? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HemaChandra88 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I have copied NPOV text agreed between a number of editors on the Sheldon Pollock page. This entire section has to do with Sheldon Pollock, and nothing about Murty Classical Library. So, you can either accept this NPOV text or delete the whole thing as being WP:UNDUE here. The petitioners haven't said a single word about the library. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Blatant Untruth serves no purpose. Title of Petition itself is "Removal of Sheldon Pollock as mentor and Chief Editor of Murty Classical Library". "Not one word" says Kautilya3.

The petition starts with the following words:

"We the undersigned would like to convey our deep appreciation for your good intentions and financial commitment to establish the Murty Classical Library of India......." It ends with specific requests. It says:

"There must be a written seret of standards and policies for the entire project, pertaining to the translation methodologies, historical assumptions and philosophical interpretations that would be used consistently in all volumes."

Is this about Sheldon Pollock only?

I am reverting the edits by Kautilya3, as he has removed duly referenced material. It may be seen that infact he has added content that is unsourced and without NPOV.

Adiagr (talk) 18:46, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

As you wish. You are simply wasting your time. Once this goes to NPOV noticeboard, they will repeat what I said that only those issues that pertain to the Murty Classical Library can stay. We will of course add Murty's "peanut gallery" response, which has clearly to do with the library. - Kautilya3 (talk) 18:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@HemaChandra88: You have deleted loads of sourced content from the NPOV text that I copied, and you have never written a single word of explanation of what you are doing. This doesn't bode well. - Kautilya3 (talk) 19:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Kautilya3 It is a request to spend some time in reading. It is not a case of mutually exclusive issues.Adiagr (talk) 19:27, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

@Adiagr: Read what, pray tell me. All the sources have been read and thoroughly debated on the Talk:Sheldon Pollock page, as the events unfolded. Neither you nor HemaChandra88 have participated in those debates. Now you come here and do edits like these:

• edit 1 where you claim that "reportedly said" is a "violation of NPOV" (I would like you to cite the policy that says that), and delete the entire response of Rohan Murty, whose library you are supposed to be talking about!
• edit 2, where you claim that "the editor is unaware of the exact sequence of events" and delete a whole bunch of explanation of how the petitioners made incompetent claims, and precisely make those very same claims! The citation you retained says the exact opposite of your claim: In fact, had the petitioners quoted the sentences preceding this paragraph, it would have been clear that Pollock was not stating his own position but critiquing the position of others. So much for "reading!"
• edit 3, where you yet again delete sourced content about Rohan Murty response hiding behind "reportedly."

This is the extent of your reading! About your co-editor HemaChandra88's edits (which you reinstated), the less said the better. I am giving you time to straighten out these problems and reinstate the NPOV text I copied. Otherwise, you will go up on everybody's radar screen as a POV-pusher. - Kautilya3 (talk) 20:35, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

• Start-Class Literature articles
• High-importance Literature articles
• Start-Class India articles
• High-importance India articles
• Start-Class India articles of High-importance
• Start-Class Indian literature articles
• Top-importance Indian literature articles
• Start-Class Indian literature articles of Top-importance
• WikiProject Indian literature articles
• India articles needing reassessment
• WikiProject India articles