Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hinduism/Assessment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the importance scale, I think there should only be around 100 "Top in Importance" articles. These articles are the ones that need to become Good articles and Featured articles. GizzaChat © 06:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Gizza, only a few articles must be rated "Top". While such a thing may seem subjective, it is needed. All other articles, which seem as important as the "Top"-rated articles must be rated "High". --NRS | T/M\B 13:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Temples
Shouldn't famous Indian temples like Jyotirlings, Shakti Peeths get a high class rating ???--Redtigerxyz 06:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
There has to be some standardization. For example the article on Dakshineswar_Kali_Temple is rated as high-importance whereas the article on Kalighat_Kali_Temple is rated as low-importance. Kalighat is almost the head quarters of Kali worship. It is a Sakthi Peeth and is very old. Both the articles of of start class.--Sankarrukku 07:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] re-alignment of importance
I went through the importance scale of the project and frankly it doesn't make any sense to me. How can non-Indian temples have higher importance than Indian temples? It should be the other way around. My recommendation:
Top: Indian temples at key pilgrimage sites. High: Major Indian temples (eg: Well visited Divya desam sites for Vaishnava temples) and well-known temples outside US Med: Temples outside US; City specific main-temples
Please let me know if there is any feedback from the current project members on this classificaiton. --Kalyan (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
