Talk:Sita

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Vaishnavism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Vaishnavism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Vaishnavism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
WikiProject_Hindu_Mythology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hindu mythology, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hindu mythology. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Wikiproject_Hinduism This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Hinduism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]


Hi,

I have put the reference to Nepal at the place where supposed identification of legendary places with present-day geography is dealt withv - Anon

Contents

[edit] Links

Is the Ramesh Menon link meant as a reference? I only enquire as I'm reading the book now. I'm not sure the following merits a link but its an entertaining look at the Ramayana from Sita's viewpoint: Sita Sings the Blues Khiradtalk 14:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] pic of ravana and sita

That's cool pic. Where's it from?--Dangerous-Boy 09:45, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This should be moved to Sita

Because the "Devi" part is honorific. Wikipedia is a secular entity. See how it uses Muhammad and Jesus, not "Prophet Muhammad" or "Jesus Christ"--202.156.6.54 12:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. And it was Sita originally, perhaps moved because of the confusion with a company. Imc 16:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 00:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

Sita Devi → Sita — This is the name she's more commonly known by. "Sita Devi" is what ISKCON calls her. Hnsampat 21:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

  • Support per reasons given in RfM and for reasons noted in section above. --Hnsampat 21:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Support per HNsampat --Arvind 11:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] Vaidehi

Vaidehi's name meaning can be incorporated in section Etymology of the name Sita. The other info in the Vaidehi article, exists in Sita. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redtigerxyz (talk • contribs) 11:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, the Vaidehi article should be immediately merged into this one. --Hnsampat 13:23, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Merged, all information already present in article --Redtigerxyz 17:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia quality standards

Salutations,

I am translating articles about India to the Portuguese Wikipedia. I was in course of translating the article about Sita. It seems complete, but there is a message at the top of the article saying that it doesn't meet Wikipedia's quality standards. I can't see what is wrong with the quality of the article; could someone explain it to me? What can I change about it to make it better, and then translate it?

Thanks in advance, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanscrit1234 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The biggest problem is that it's unsourced and tries to pass off various elements of Sita as "fact." Much has been written about Sita and there are a wide variety of beliefs about her. I don't think it's fair to take any single belief and treat it as fact. Instead, the article should discuss what various Ramayanas by various authors have said about Sita and what beliefs different people have developed about her. --Hnsampat 02:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)