Santoshdts (talk | contribs) →Destruction of Somanatha: reply |
Ms Sarah Welch (talk | contribs) →Review and cleanup: new section |
||
Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
I propose no changes be made to this normally sleepy article while everybody is busy dealing with COVID-19. {{U|Santoshdts}} is not engaged in summarising what the reliable sources say, but rather to say what he wants to see while making little concessions to reliable sources. To truly summarise the reliable sources, he needs to focus on the phrases I highlighted above. -- [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 11:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC) |
I propose no changes be made to this normally sleepy article while everybody is busy dealing with COVID-19. {{U|Santoshdts}} is not engaged in summarising what the reliable sources say, but rather to say what he wants to see while making little concessions to reliable sources. To truly summarise the reliable sources, he needs to focus on the phrases I highlighted above. -- [[User:Kautilya3|Kautilya3]] ([[User talk:Kautilya3|talk]]) 11:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
:Iam trying to edit this sleepy article as I find it bit incomplete in that particular section. It just mentions Mahmud came, raided plundered and took away some million dinars. I just wanted to add the Motive for doing so, as available in RS. The extract you have quoted is been discussed in almost all the works of modern Historians. And the last sentence from your quote says "some taking it seriously, others being less emphatic and insisting instead that the icon was of a Hindu deity.", Iam not taking any side in this discussion and, I have summarized the same in my second sentence '''{{tq|However, there is another apocryphal narrative with little or no evidence, from a contemporary chronicler}}'''. however if you still feel the second part of my edit reffering to manat is inappropriate, I am willing remove it and keep the first sentence as it is, which deals with his ''assessment of iconoclasm'', Irrespective of the idol being of Hindu or Pre-Islamic Arab deity Manat. Thanks [[User:Santoshdts|Santoshdts]] ([[User talk:Santoshdts|talk]]) 12:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC) |
:Iam trying to edit this sleepy article as I find it bit incomplete in that particular section. It just mentions Mahmud came, raided plundered and took away some million dinars. I just wanted to add the Motive for doing so, as available in RS. The extract you have quoted is been discussed in almost all the works of modern Historians. And the last sentence from your quote says "some taking it seriously, others being less emphatic and insisting instead that the icon was of a Hindu deity.", Iam not taking any side in this discussion and, I have summarized the same in my second sentence '''{{tq|However, there is another apocryphal narrative with little or no evidence, from a contemporary chronicler}}'''. however if you still feel the second part of my edit reffering to manat is inappropriate, I am willing remove it and keep the first sentence as it is, which deals with his ''assessment of iconoclasm'', Irrespective of the idol being of Hindu or Pre-Islamic Arab deity Manat. Thanks [[User:Santoshdts|Santoshdts]] ([[User talk:Santoshdts|talk]]) 12:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC) |
||
== Review and cleanup == |
|||
[[File:Ancient Somnath temple, Veraval Gujarat.jpg|thumb|180px|Floor plan of the Somnath temple, Veraval Gujarat]] |
|||
The [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Somnath_temple&oldid=1037808827 current article] is an odd state, given its importance and sensitive controversies surrounding it. In the current version: |
|||
*there is a big section on history. Ok, that is indeed important and needs NPOV, WP:HISTRS and mainstream scholarship. |
|||
*the rest of the article is weak, hardly anything about the temple. It has a significant [[WP:Coatrack]] section about some gate in Afghanistan (a note would suffice here), something about South pole cited to OR on google maps, and such. |
|||
*some other parts are cited to non-[[WP:HISTRS]], non-[[WP:RS]] sources. |
|||
*there is little about ''the Somnath temple'', its architecture, what does one see outside and inside (mandapa, artwork), its relationship to Hindu traditions, its significance and notability, what else is in / near this complex and how is it related / notable, and other aspects. |
|||
I will try to address some of this, add in the missing parts (such as the floor plan image) based on scholarly literature, do some clean up, may be move subsections into more relevant articles, summarize much more peer reviewed scholarship. I welcome collaborative suggestions and comments. Or perhaps, someone can do the clean up and expansion, save me the effort. |
|||
:– [[User:Ms Sarah Welch|Ms Sarah Welch]] ([[User talk:Ms Sarah Welch|talk]]) 11:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:09, 12 August 2021
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Gems of Sree Somnath Temple
From Leisure Hours Among the Gems by Augustus Choate Hamlim (1884)
"The famous Hindoo Temple of Sumnat(Somnath) was, in the days of its perfection, one of the most renowned of all the shrines of India, and must have been a structure of wonderful richness, when it's 56 pillars, incrusted and inlaid with multitudes of precious stones, sparkled in the morning light. Even at the present day its ruins, though despoiled of their ornaments, are very beautiful and impressive." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.216.83.162 (talk) 12:50, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Possible copyright violations
Parts of the article look like copies from some of the listed websites. Of course, the Wikipedia article may be what was copied. Robin Patterson (talk) 04:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Images
- Historic Images of Somnath British Library --Ekabhishek (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
in the earlier version there used to be a painting of soldiers with javelins inside the temple and amazed at the installation of idol which was hanging in air. Made of loadstone it was uniquely placed by magnetic effects between the canopy and floor magnetic effects. That was how the temple was famous.
Pl reinstate the original version of the article.
there is much deletion of info from this 89.211.163.48 (talk) 14:18, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Merge proposal for Prabhas Patan
I'm proposing a merge since these two articles seem to refer to the same thing. Clifflandis (talk) 19:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose: Somnath refers to the temple, Prabhas to the place.--Redtigerxyz Talk 06:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose: Somanth is a small town in Junagadh district. It does not refer to the temple but to the town or to the Jyotirlinga in the temple. Prabhas Patan is often referred as Balukha (Balkha) tirth. I think a separate article named Somnath temple has to be created and the present article should give info about the town. --WorLD8115(TalK) 16:57, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose: Somanth refers to the temple, where as Prabhas Patan is the place in which it is located. Yessrao|Sushanth 11:49, 20 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yessrao (talk • contribs)
"occupation" vs "control"
A user by the name TEK has reverted my efforts to make the article seem as neutral as possible; and free from any POVs. I believe that the article should state control instead of occupation, since it makes the efforts by the Indian Govt. to liberate the area seem illegal. The overwhelming majority of people in Junagadh reject any claim that the region is anything other, and has been anything than an integral district of India. Would anyone else believe otherwise? --92.20.213.74 (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- This is one of those India-Pakistan debates that would last till the end of time if it didn't exhaust everyone. NPOV is something I agree with always, but your words above ("makes the efforts by the Indian Govt. to liberate the area seem illegal") express one POV on the issue. A different POV would say that the Junagadh issue shows selective application of rules by India - i.e. supporting the ruler of Kashmir against the "general population" of the state and conversely supporting the "general population" of Junagadh against the ruler of the state. We need to present both sides of the argument and the word "control" does not seem appropriate here. Instead I would recommend "stabilisation" followed by a few words to say that this was seen as an occupation by the Pakistani side. Green Giant (talk) 04:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Somnath to the Antarctic?
I have added a citation request for a small unsourced paragraph in the "Architecture" section which states:
“ | The temple is situated at such a place that there is no land in straight-line between Somnath seashore till Antarctica, such an inscription in Sanskrit is found on the Arrow-Pillar called Baan-Stambh erected on the sea-protection wall at the Somnath Temple. This Baan-Stambh mentions that it stands at a point on the Indian landmass, which happens to be the first point on land in the north to the south-pole on that particular longitude. | ” |
From somnath.org, I note there is a paragraph stating:
“ | The Kalash at the top of the Shikhar weighs 10 tons and the Dhwajdand is 27 feet tall and 1 foot in circumference. The Abadhit Samudra Marg, Tirsthambh (Arrow) indicates the unobstructed sea route to the South Pole. The nearest land towards South Pole is about 9936 km. away. This is a wonderful indicator of the ancient Indian wisdom of geography and strategic location of the Jyotirling. The temple renovated by Maharani Ahalyabai is adjacent to the main temple complex. | ” |
This is probably the source of the Wikipedia paragraph, but since it is a pretty significant claim and "somnath.org" cannot be regarded as being neutral on such a matter (especially given the sentences about "Indian wisdom"), I think it would be better to have this verified by a reliable source. Green Giant (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Although it might verge on original research, I tested the veracity of the claim by drawing a line directly from Somnath to the South Pole on Google Earth, and found that the Kerguelen island of Grande Terre lies on that line. If it was a tiny outcrop of rock, I might have been convinced but Grande Terre covers 6,675 km2 (2,577 sq mi). In order to fulfill the claim, the temple would need to be located either some 24km to the southeast (a place called Muldwarka) or some 300km to the northwest in the district of Kutch. I have therefore removed the paragraph until such time as there is a reliable third-party source. Green Giant (talk) 06:51, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Have you perhaps considered that closer to the south pole the land mass shift over the years and the south pole itself shifts 10km every year? So given that the Somnath Temple was originaly constructed way before the 1st Century, then Kerguelen Islands would not have been in the straight line from Somnath to South Pole! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.89.131.67 (talk) 14:13, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
edit warring by IP editor
An IP editor is edit warring to remove sourced content. He began with removing portions of a direct quote with misleading edit summaries. When i reverted and added more reliable references, he is now removing the entire quote because he doesn't like it. He is even claiming google books should not be used as a source!. The source i am using is Sir Henry Miers Elliot's The history of India, as told by its own historians: the Muhammadan period; which is one of the most authoritative compilations of original accounts of Islamic historians of India.--Sodabottle (talk) 12:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Asaru-L- Bilad quote
MY EDIT
- (cur | prev) 21:26, 28 February 2014 Clapkidaq (talk | contribs) . . (23,407 bytes) (+2,107) . . (rv unexplained deletion by pov warrior see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.wikipedia/u4dJIwvCQc4) (undo)
was reverted because of reason it is not reliable source. BUT Asaru-L- Bilad is a reliable historian as is Elliot, from whom the citation comes.
I let others decide if this quote is noteworthy for this article. THANS<.--Clapkidaq (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits
@Manojkhurana: You seem to have recently added a huge amount of material without any sources and a single edit summary. Can you please added sources for your content? Otherwise, I am minded to delete it all. Kautilya3 (talk) 14:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, @Kautilya3:. This addition is based on my own experience of journey to this place. If you can see I have merely rearranged infromation already avaialble on page in mythology section by creating a new section on Bhalka Tirth. So, I don't think this needs to be deleted. I have also added a new section on connectivity of this place. This one is based on experience and I'm constrained at this time to add references. If you can help in it, most welcome. This can be cross checked from Gujrat Tourism's site. If you wish I should do it, I request you to please wait till Sunday. Other than these I have worked only on formatting,spellings & resizing & refitting photos only. I have also corrected few titles by removing Hindi from titles & placing them in main text. Regards.--Manoj Khurana (talk) 06:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, @Kautilya3:- Added reference in railway section. Will try to add more by Sunday. I'm also planning to create a new page for Bhalka and keep only brief information about that on Somnath page.--Manoj Khurana (talk) 08:12, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, @Kautilya3:. I have added the references and also rearranged/cleaned up a little. Please consider removing the tags. Thanks.--Manoj Khurana (talk) 14:09, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Manoj, thanks for adding references. However, my tags were really meant for the content that was already present, a lot of which is still unsourced. The tags are helpful to invite editors who can fix things as well as to ward off editors who might think of adding more unsourced material. If you can help more, please do so by all means. Cheers, Kautilya3 (talk) 22:25, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Unsourced gates content
@Nizil Shah: You have reinstated unsourced content removed by an IP user [1]. According to WP:BURDEN, it is now your responsibility to supply the RS supporting the content. Can you do so please? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:01, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- Kautilya3, I have added refs directly in the article. Please check it out. And if you can not read due to Snippet view in the Google books, search Mahadaji Shinde somnath ujjain in Google Books as this shows more text than snippets. :) Regards,--Nizil (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I am sorry. None of these is a reliable source for history. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:32, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Why? I can not understand. I ref I cited are books and the text of original proclamation. --Nizil (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- No, you are talking about the second paragraph. The current dispute is about the first paragraph, which you have reinstated after deletion. You then cited a tourism book and a pilgrimage book, which are not reliable sources for history. If these are the best sources you could find, the paragraph has to go. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:42, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Why? I can not understand. I ref I cited are books and the text of original proclamation. --Nizil (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- I am sorry. None of these is a reliable source for history. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:32, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
- Kautilya3, I have added refs directly in the article. Please check it out. And if you can not read due to Snippet view in the Google books, search Mahadaji Shinde somnath ujjain in Google Books as this shows more text than snippets. :) Regards,--Nizil (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Timings
There are timings added in the lead of article. I have not removed them yet but I think they do not belong here as Wikipedia is encyclopedia and such timings belong to Wikivoyage. Should I removed them?--Nizil (talk) 13:18, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the clean-up. I think it is best not to mention that K. M. Munshi was a Cabinet minister, because there is some ambiguity as to whether he was wearing that hat in doing the temple work. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Somnath
It is unclear from the article that what role Sardar Patel played in the reconstruction of the temple. The lead says he "envisioned" and the reconstruction section says he "ordered" the reconstruction. The next line says he was among the delegation to meet Gandhi about the subject. And then says he died. So what role he played actually and to what extent? The reference about the order " Hindustan Times, 15 Nov, 1947" is not accessible. Regards,--Nizil (talk) 11:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
- Patel was the Deputy Prime Minister and the Home Minister. He ordered its reconstruction and it was done. I don't see what more you want. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
- So his role was limited to the ordering the reconstruction. Did he played any role in fundraising or making other leaders agree for the reconstruction? Did he issued the order on behalf of the Government of India in his capacity of Deputy PM/HM? I read that Nehru was not happy about it. So I want to know and add what role he played in the reconstruction apart from just ordering.--Nizil (talk) 06:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
- Nehru did not want the Indian government involved in the reconstruction because it would compromise its secularism. But the government (the Public Works Department) still carried out the construction, with private charity funding. I suppose Nehru turned a blind eye to it, because it was an emotive issue for the Hindus. I don't know much more about Patel's involvement. I suppose that had he been alive, he would performed the opening ceremony. President Rajendra Prasad did it instead. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
- So his role was limited to the ordering the reconstruction. Did he played any role in fundraising or making other leaders agree for the reconstruction? Did he issued the order on behalf of the Government of India in his capacity of Deputy PM/HM? I read that Nehru was not happy about it. So I want to know and add what role he played in the reconstruction apart from just ordering.--Nizil (talk) 06:38, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:03, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Destruction of Somanatha
Hi, this is regarding recent discussion with Nizil Shah
and kautilya3
In view of ongoing discussion regarding the topic in above mentioned talk pages, I have rephrased my edit as following: The purpose of the raid could have been political, economic in nature of which undoubtedly iconoclasm was also one of the motivation.[1] However, there is another apocryphal narrative from a contemporary chronicler Farrukhi Sistani, who established connection to an idol of "Manāt" from Ka‘ba with Somanatha, which said "Somanatha or Somnāt (as it was often rendered in Persian) was a garbled version of su-manāt — referring to the goddess Manāt.[2]
- Please take time to review the above proposed edit. Thanks. Santoshdts (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
References
- As you rightly said, the story of Manāt is questionable and has no evidence. I have included that as questionable narrative, I think it would be appropriate, if I add
However, there is another apocryphal narrative with little or no evidence, from a contemporary chronicler...
. As expanding the section with “little or no historical evidence” would not help the encyclopaedia. Your comments please. Thanks.- OK, go ahead. Please do not forget to sign your comment. -Nizil (talk) 08:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Oops. Sorry, I missed to sign my last comment and glad to see we arrived at consensus. Thanks.Santoshdts (talk) 10:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- OK, go ahead. Please do not forget to sign your comment. -Nizil (talk) 08:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- As you rightly said, the story of Manāt is questionable and has no evidence. I have included that as questionable narrative, I think it would be appropriate, if I add
Romila Thapar:
Not unexpectedly, the Turko-Persian chronicles indulge in elaborate myth-making around the event, some of which I shall now relate. A major poet of the eastern Islamic world, Farrukhi Sistani, who claims that he accompanied Mahmud to Somanatha, provides a fascinating explanation for the breaking of the idol. This explanation has been largely dismissed by modern historians as too fanciful, but it has a significance for the assessment of iconoclasm. According to him, the idol was not of a Hindu deity but of a pre-Islamic Arabian goddess. He tells us that the name Somnat (as it was often written in Persian) is actually Su-manat, the place of Manat. We know from the Qur'an that Lat, Uzza and Manat were the three pre-Islamic goddesses widely worshipped, and the destruction of their shrines and images, it was said, had been ordered by the Prophet Mohammad. Two were destroyed, but Manat was believed to have been secreted away to Gujarat and installed in a place of worship. According to some descriptions, Manat was an aniconic block of black stone, so the form could be similar to a lingam. This story hovers over many of the Turko-Persian accounts, some taking it seriously, others being less emphatic and insisting instead that the icon was of a Hindu deity.[1]
I propose no changes be made to this normally sleepy article while everybody is busy dealing with COVID-19. Santoshdts is not engaged in summarising what the reliable sources say, but rather to say what he wants to see while making little concessions to reliable sources. To truly summarise the reliable sources, he needs to focus on the phrases I highlighted above. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:32, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- Iam trying to edit this sleepy article as I find it bit incomplete in that particular section. It just mentions Mahmud came, raided plundered and took away some million dinars. I just wanted to add the Motive for doing so, as available in RS. The extract you have quoted is been discussed in almost all the works of modern Historians. And the last sentence from your quote says "some taking it seriously, others being less emphatic and insisting instead that the icon was of a Hindu deity.", Iam not taking any side in this discussion and, I have summarized the same in my second sentence
However, there is another apocryphal narrative with little or no evidence, from a contemporary chronicler
. however if you still feel the second part of my edit reffering to manat is inappropriate, I am willing remove it and keep the first sentence as it is, which deals with his assessment of iconoclasm, Irrespective of the idol being of Hindu or Pre-Islamic Arab deity Manat. Thanks Santoshdts (talk) 12:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Review and cleanup
The current article is an odd state, given its importance and sensitive controversies surrounding it. In the current version:
- there is a big section on history. Ok, that is indeed important and needs NPOV, WP:HISTRS and mainstream scholarship.
- the rest of the article is weak, hardly anything about the temple. It has a significant WP:Coatrack section about some gate in Afghanistan (a note would suffice here), something about South pole cited to OR on google maps, and such.
- some other parts are cited to non-WP:HISTRS, non-WP:RS sources.
- there is little about the Somnath temple, its architecture, what does one see outside and inside (mandapa, artwork), its relationship to Hindu traditions, its significance and notability, what else is in / near this complex and how is it related / notable, and other aspects.
I will try to address some of this, add in the missing parts (such as the floor plan image) based on scholarly literature, do some clean up, may be move subsections into more relevant articles, summarize much more peer reviewed scholarship. I welcome collaborative suggestions and comments. Or perhaps, someone can do the clean up and expansion, save me the effort.
- – Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
- ^ Romila Thapar, Somatha and Mahmud, Frontline, 10 April 1999.