Talk:Vijayanagara literature in Kannada

Copy-editing notes

Two comments inserted in the Overview section:

• "Nemichandra's (12th century) writing on love was an early example of the change in literary style, and also reflected the hostility toward the Veerashaivas; the Jain author found it ideal to narrate the story of Manmatha, the God of Love, who turned Shiva into a half woman." (what form of writing was it? using another word would make this sentence more interesting)

I will address this.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I changed the poet, writing but the rest of the theme is the same (hostility towards Veerashaivas). The poet has a link page too which I recently created.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• "...not poets in the courtly sense, rather those who travelled across the Kannada speaking region, cutting across court and monastery, writing poems (in the tripadi metre) and inflicting themselves on peoplewith their humanistic values which overcame social barriers of caste and religion. Sarvajna (often compared to Telugu poet Vemana), Sisunala Sherif, Mupina Sadakshari, Navalingayogi and Kadakolada Madivalappa are the best–known among them." (really? they forced themselves on people? could you perhaps mean evangelising or proselytising?)

I will change the wording.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

changed sentence to writing poems (in the tripadi metre) and influencing the lives of people with their humanistic values ....Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:18, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Why does the Vaishnava section come before the Veerashaiva section, when historically they appear to have come in the opposite order?
  

Good catch. Will change it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, hold off until I have finished working on it tonight, I notice the Jain section is even further back, but historically it should probably be the first, correct? Risker (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I felt that Jain writings being on a wane needed to be last, but if you feel it should go first because of chronology, then we can move the entire section up.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You have a good point there, and I note that Ruhrfisch didn't make this suggestion in his peer review, either. Maybe it should be left as it is for now, and see what the comments are at FAC, where a proper discussion can take place with opinions from several editors. At the end of the day, this is the article you have poured yourself into, and I would not want to impose such a significant change unilaterally when you have already received positive feedback in this format. Risker (talk) 03:10, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

More notes will follow as I go along; feel free to insert comments into my questions. Risker (talk) 01:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• Where is the peer review archived? I note a red link above, and don't see this article on the current list. Risker (talk) 01:48, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

The peer review is here.[1]

Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• The Vaishnava section has one comment:

"Airavata (1430) by Kumara Vyasa recounts an episode from the Mahabharata and is a story of the elephant of God Indra. (Do you mean "elephant God Indra" - when I look at the link to Indra, it doesn't mention elephants.) Risker (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

No Airavata is the name of the celestial Elephant that Indra rides on.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I suppose I should have looked at Airavata too! :-) I am learning so much about Indian cultures and traditions by working with you, DK. I'll make a slight rearrangement to the sentence so that others don't make the same mistake as I did. Risker (talk) 02:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Continuing copy-editing notes

From the 2nd para of the Jain section:

• "One of the most popular poets of Kannada literature, Ratnakaravarni had passionate relationships with both court and monastery;..."

• Consider replacing this word, as it gives the impression of eroticism, which may not be the intent. Please consult reference text if necessary.

Done.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• "A radical and sensitive poet, he once claimed that spiritual meditation "was boring"."

• Direct quote should be referenced, as it is likely to be challenged

DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

From the 3rd para of same section:

• "Bharatadesa Vaibhava is a version of the earlier Poorvapurana by Jinasenacharya..."

• Is this a specific person? is the name Jinasenacharya or Jinasena Charya? if it is the latter, please make sure his name is mentioned in the wikilinked article
  

Jinasena and Jinasenacharya are both applicable. The ending "acharya" only is a honorific like Pundit.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Secular section:

• Consider retitling this section to "Secular writings", as the word "secular" seems quite stark. (this could apply to all sections, but is particularly noticeable here).

--Risker (talk) 05:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

done.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Further notes on the Secular section:

• "However, a claim that Sobagina Sone was actually written by King Deva Raya II has been made."

• Suggest specifying exactly "who" made this claim within the text, not just the reference
  

--Risker (talk) 06:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

More notes

From the Bhakti literature section:

• "Purandara Dasa ....is believed to have composed 475,000 songs..."

• a reference would be useful here, I seem to recall you found one about this fact in the other article.

I have cited this thrice at the end of the para, but will replicate it next to the number also.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• "The latter writing, which is on niti (morals), bhakti (devotion) and vairagya (renunciation), has found popularity as a standard book of learning for children."

• is it continued to be used as a standard reference, or was it a standard book of learning? I just want to make sure the tenses are correct.

(More to follow) Risker (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The writings of Kanaka dasa are still popular.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your replies, DK. I am going to have to stop for tonight, as I have some RL responsibilities to address. Tomorrow and Tuesday evenings I will copy edit the lede (it's always best to save it to last in case something changes in the content of the article), and will review all of the various notes on this page to make sure all of the points have been addressed. I note that User:Michael Devore has also been helping out in the copy editing, and his additional eyes are very much appreciated.

One last suggestion: Consider a brief closing section with some comment, if available in the references, on how the development of Kannada literature during the period of the Vijayanagara Empire continues to be reflected in today's writing. It does not need to be more than 5-6 sentences, and might include things like whether or not some of the theatrical scripts are still performed, the mention of the book still used as a primer for children, the continuing research and so on. Risker (talk) 01:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I will try and come up with some closing comments.thanks,Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Further to our discussion on my talk page, I concur that, given your varying experiences at FAC, it is probably better to wait until you have heard the opinions of other editors to decide if this is something that would be of value. Risker (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

More comments again

• I've copy edited the lede now, it is concise but appears to carry all of the necessary information. :-) One note only.
• "Interaction between Kannada and Telugu literatures left lasting influences that continued after the Vijayanagara era."

• I have added a the last 6 words to this sentence, please revert if not supported by the reference, but I think it is correct. It is intended to give an example of the "lasting influences".

I am now going to go over the article once again, to pick up little things that I might have missed, and to ensure the comments on this page are addressed; I'll try to finish up tonight. Risker (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Your additional words are accurate.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Phew! Some day I will have to listen to some of these stories (perhaps in translation?), they almost feel like old friends now. Risker (talk) 03:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

DK's comments

• Risker, in this sentence below, I intended to onvey a different meaning:

Meanwhile, the radical writings of 16th century poet Ratnakaravarni had made way for a new kind of poetry heralded by those who spoke traditionally; not poets in the courtly sense.

I meant to say that these poets who heralded a new form of poetry were not "poets" in the traditional sense, but those who wrote poetry without any royal patronage and generally were on the "move".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Addressed. Risker (talk) 03:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

• You may choose to chop/reduce the paragraph describing the famous writing (Bharatadesa Vaibhava) by Ratnakaravarni when you get to the "Jain" section because the details exist in the linked article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I've left it as it is; it reads well and adds a bit of colour. It can be reduced, if recommended at FAC. Risker (talk) 04:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

• When I make a certain change based on your query, please ensure the style of my change is acceptable too. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:07, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Copy-editing complete

I've completed the requested copy-edit now, and have no additional comments. I believe all of my notes on this page have been addressed, and all of DK's changes appear to be appropriate. Thanks for having asked me to participate. Best, Risker (talk) 04:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

c. 990 vs 990 CE

I note that a date within the article has been changed from c. 990 to 990 CE. While I am all in favour of other eyes carrying out additional copy-editing, particularly in an article of this length, this particular change concerns me. The abbreviation "c." stands for circa, which means "around" or "approximately". It is my understanding that the date comes directly from the reference text, and indicates an approximate date when the work was written. All of the dates in this article are CE dates, and thus the addition of that abbreviation is superfluous, or perhaps would best be included at the first use of a date; it seems excessive to add it throughout the article, and not sensible to have it attached to one or two dates in the middle. The Manual of style is silent on a preferred course for articles in which all the dates are CE. Unless there is opposition, I will review and revert this and any other similar changes in the article. Risker (talk) 05:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Vijayanagara literature in Kannada considered for Main Page

There is an ongoing discussion on whether to feature the WP:FA quality article Vijayanagara literature in Kannada on the Main Page.

You may participate at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Vijayanagara literature in Kannada.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 17:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Kannada and other non-English words in italics

Bit of nit-picking, given that this is proposed to be a FA article. This has to do with Kannada and other non English names and transliteration. There is significant use of italics when presenting non English words; e.g. in the phrase below, quoted with markup -

about early Veerashaiva saints and vachanakaras (vachana poets)

This implies that the word vachanakaras is a Kannada word, which I don't believe it is. The final 's' is an English plural surely. Similar English plurals are found elsewhere. If the plural word is necessary it should be the Kannada form, e.g. 'galu'.

Also the transliteration system should be consistent through the article. I'd suggest the standard iso system. For instance in the above quote 'Veerashaiva' is definitely out of place when 'vira...', from the same source and with the same pronunciation occurs in many other words and names in the article.

Imc (talk) 14:12, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

I think you have a point, but when I researched some well known books written on literature, this type of 'Anglasization' is common and quite standard. Here are some examples: [2] (page 168-171, p194), [3] (p.958) [4], [5], just to quote a few examples. Usage of Vachanas instead of Vachanagalu, Sharanas instead of Sharanaru, Veerashaivas instead of Veerashaivaru is common. The same goes for Haridasas instead of Haridarasu.Mayasandra (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Here are more examples for Veerashaivas ([6], [7]), for Haridasas ([8], [9]. This can become an endless list, so I will stop here.Mayasandra (talk) 18:11, 1 November 2014 (UTC)