Talk:Mount Kailash

Tallest mountain in Tibet?

Why should the mountains in Category:Mountains of Tibet not be considered mountains of Tibet? Everest is on the border between Nepal and Tibet, so it's Tibet's highest mountain, so Kailash isn't Tibet's highest mountain. I don't see any ambiguity here. Kosebamse 18:16, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've rewritten the intro to clarify the situation. I've also withdrawn my objection on Category:Mountains of Tibet. —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 21:29, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

The intro looks fine now. Thanks for your help. Kosebamse 21:52, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

====================

Kailash is not the tallest mountain in Tibet even if you exclude the Himalayas. The Nyanqentanglha range in central Tibet has peaks over 7000m. You really should remove this claim totally. (Gordon Aug 22 2005)

====================

I have noted under the subtitle Buddhism in the article that there is some confusion regarding the identity of the "Champion of Tantric Buddhism". Although I think Padmasambhava is likely to be the person to which the contributor is refering, the accuracy of the passage in general may require checking. 83.100.165.35 19:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)(RD 15th November 2006)

I WANT TO KNOW ANY BODY HUMAN MAN HAVE TO SEE A MOUNT KAILASH S CAFE?

Curiously this Mystique Mountain in the Tibetan plateau is the focal point for the Hindus and the Buddhists alike. The surfacial features of this mountain are unique and I think no other structure in the Tibetan plateau or in the Himalayan range have any resemblance to this mountain. The Hindus and the Buddhists consider this place encompassing the nearby lake of Manasarovar as heavenly place. No wonder as this part of the Tibetan Plateau indeed is one of the most magnificent places on earth. There must be something here in this place which attracts the two religions alike. Vgyan 09:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Buddhism is a kind of "reform Hinduism". You could say that the Buddha critiqued and transformed Hindu doctrine much as Jesus and his followers transformed Judaism into Christianity. In the process the Buddha also transformed a somewhat nationalistic, place-rooted and historical religion into something more universal and broadly accessible. So if the Kailas/Maasarovar region is holy to Hindus, that status tends to carry over into Buddhism, just as the holy land for Christians largely overlaps that of Judaism.

For a long time Hindu cosmography postulated a Mount Meru, center of the universe, but they were not quite certain of its location. Sometimes it was located in the Vindhya range separating the culturally different regions of North and South India, sometimes it was placed in the Pamir Knot. However as geographic knowledge accumulated, it became clear that the Kailas/Manasarovar region in effect was the hydrographic nexus of South Asia, for the Indus, Ganges/Karnali and Brahmaputra rivers all have their sources in this very finite area. Thus Kailas came to reify Mount Meru. LADave (talk) 07:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:TG PartTwo.jpg

The image Image:TG PartTwo.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Inaccuracies about Climbing the Mountain

It seems that people definitely climb this mountain. See, for example, http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock/151369/Kailash.html or http://www.summitpost.org/view_object.php?object_id=151369

There have been no verified ascents of the mountain. The website you mention, http://www.summitpost.org/mountain/rock/151369/Kailash.html#chapter_10 explicitly refutes rumours that the mountain has been climbed. BabelStone (talk) 18:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

श or स?

The Sanskrit name is spelled with the letter श ś. In a Hindi context the spelling with स s has also been of frequent occurrence.

The Oxford Hindi Dictionary (I have the 1997 printing) gives कैलास as the main entry, while कैलाश is cross-referenced to it as a "pronunciation variant." So Oxford seems to be citing कैलास as the standard form in Hindi.

The Hindi Vikipīḍiyā article on this mountain uses only the spelling with श. The Hindi editors there have chosen to make no mention of the spelling कैलास for the mountain. In other words, it looks like the tadbhava form has been completely replaced by the tatsama form here. Is this a sign of a movement toward increased Sanskritization of Hindi? This article not only implicitly makes कैलाश the standard form, it ignores the other form altogether, which Oxford gave as standard Hindi.

So my questions are: How do they decide when to use which form of the name? Do you think the English and Hindi Wikipedias should mention the tadbhava form too (if only to note that it is also commonly met with)? I mean, as a foreign student of Sanskrit and Hindi, I always got confused about which spelling is actually preferred. Maybe a little clarification would be helpful to foreigners studying this subject. Thank you. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Where is a citation to श ś being the Sanskrit form? Monier Williams disagrees: it gives स s as the only form, and cites "MBh. iii , 503 & 1697 Hariv. R. iii , iv , 44 , 27 VarBr2S. &c". For that matter, where is the citation for the meaning crystal either: I know of no etymology in Sanskrit that would give that. 65.100.126.153 (talk) 03:28, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

This article has been propagating the most brazen falsehoods. The Sanskrit term is कैलास; there's no कैलाश in Sanskrit as has been so confidently asserted in the article. I'm fixing it. Shreevatsa (talk) 08:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

See why this gets confusing? I wish there were a reliable source that could sort out just what is what. Why are there two spellings? I think the article ought to clarify this point, if anyone knows the answer. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 04:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

It seems that Sanskrit "s" sometimes becomes "ś" in Hindi. Thus "Kausalyā" -> "Kauśalyā", "Kailāsa" -> "Kailāś", "Dhanus" -> "Dhanuś" etc. Kannan91 (talk) 12:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it only goes the other way around. Sanskrit ś > Hindi s. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 22:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Maybe that's the usual rule, but it's reversed for these instances at least. If you look up those words (see Monier Williams) , you'll find that the version with a normal "s" is the original Sanskrit. This is also reflected in how these words have been borrowed from Sanskrit into other languages - eg. Malayalam, which has a "ś" for "śiva" "śakti" etc, but a "s" for "Kailāsa", "Dhanus", "Kausalyā". Kannan91 (talk) 12:57, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I see. Thank you for the information. So anyway we still don't seem to have gotten any closer to an answer to this question. I feel that somewhere someone must have studied this and published a good explanation of it. Just got to keep looking for it. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 18:40, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Thubron attempts

I've removed the passage saying that Colin Thubron attempted to climb the mountain between the wars because there was no reference given for this claim. Perhaps he did, but we need a reference. Ericoides (talk) 09:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Mount Kailash/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

While there are a number of references, inline citations are lacking for many of the statements made. A number of the sections contain just one statement and some of the paragraphs have unrelated statements within them. The article just reads like some peoples' opinions on the religious significance of the mountain. RedWolf (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 00:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Scripts

Lead paragraphs are meant to display scripts of the location in which a subject is found. Kailash is in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, though several months ago, the Chinese/Tibetan names were removed and replaced with Sanskrit - a language not officially in use in the TAR. Of course, there is a major Hindu/Jain connection to this mountain, and so the Sanskrit is rightfully listed in the Etymology section, but keep in mind this mountain is in China's TAR, and so Chinese and Tibetan must be used. The addition of Sanskrit to the lead, again, is not justified because this isn't a subject exclusive to Hinduism, such as pages written about Hindu gods that list Sanskrit in the lead paragraph. This is a mountain in a region of China - and that is the primary topic of the page. Willard84 (talk) 00:28, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

I think what you did here is fine, and I agree with your reasoning. The Hindu/Jain connection is not denied, but this is a geographical article not a religious one. There's no problem with mentions of the religious connections in the article body, given appropriate weight, but the lead is, imo, correct as you have it now in this regard. -- Begoon 02:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used in this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The file Ashtapad replica.png on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for speedy deletion. View the deletion reason at the Commons file description page. Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

wild mountain god Shiva and a symbol of his Linga(its symbole of universal energy, Linga is Sanskrit word)?

This is straight vandalism. Anyone even with a surface level knowledge of Religious significance of Kailash in Hinduism knows that God Shiva is in no way connected as wild, and mountain God. And there is no relation between Kailash and any Shiv Linga. A google search of Kailash has no article even remotely suggesting this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by TrueWinger (talk • contribs) 10:13, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Adding a correctly attributed quote from a source published by a reputable publisher is not vandalism, and it is not constructive to refer to it as such. If you do not believe that the source is reliable, please present your evidence for that - Google searches are largely irrelevant, and referring to general knowledge isn't very helpful either. --bonadea contributions talk 10:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

(for the record, I have no particular opinion here - maybe the quoted book is based on poor research, but the fact remains that the quote comes from the book, and the book is published by a reputable publishing house. Then again, if this is the only source for the "mountain-as-penis" claim, there might be good reason to remove it, but there has to be a consensus based on Wikipedia policy.) --bonadea contributions talk 10:50, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

A google search suggests that the identification of Mount Kailash with Shiva's penis is not the invention of a single author, but has fairly wide currency. I would oppose removing the quote just because it hurts the sensibilities of some readers. The continuing vandalism of the quotation is likely to result in a Streisand effect as editors find more sources for this identification and devote a whole section of the article to what was originally a passing mention. BabelStone (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

In case it is useful for future editors, this edit from 2010 seems to be the one in which the unbowdlerised quote was introduced. It appears that offended parties have been edit-warring about it since then. Zazpot (talk) 01:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

The translation of Lingam into penis is just wrong which western authors often do. The lingam is symbolic of the power of male and female not their genitals. If it is indeed supposed to represent a penis, it would look much different.SureshK 67 (talk) 05:21, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

If there is a source for the mountain as lingam then we can add that as an explanation for the quote. I think the quote is useful as it stands, and would object to its removal or partial censorship, but we could add some contextual explanation to help readers better understand the basis for the quote. BabelStone (talk) 11:49, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

A Lingam (लिङ्गम्) in sanskrit means sign, symbol or mark and is symbolic representation of the god Shiva.

Here is a portion of from wikipedia article Shiva which talks about mount Kailash:

"Mount Kailāsa: Mount Kailash in the Himalayas is his traditional abode. In Hindu mythology, Mount Kailāsa is conceived as resembling a Linga, representing the center of the universe." [1]

I couldn't find the free version of the referenced book in the above article "The Illustrated Dictionary of Hindu Iconography by Margaret Stutley".

Here are some other books that back up the claim that Mt. Kailash in Hinduism is seen as linga. [2], [3], [4].

I would recommend to include the portion that i quoted from article Shiva directly below the quote of Alice Albinia if partial censoring or paraphrasing of her quote can't be done.SureshK 67 (talk) 15:33, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

"Mount Kailas"

The article includes a quotation that spells the mountain "Mount Kailas". This is correct, an alternate orthography of the Sanskrt name, omitting only a diacritical mark over the "s" that indicates one of the Sanskrt pronunciations of "sh", since the source article is in English. See also the section "श or स?" above. David Spector (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

mount Kaylas in Russia [5] 176.65.96.155 (talk) 06:55, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Mount Kailash is a residence of our God Shiva/Mahadev

Mount Kailash is a residence of our God Shiva/Mahadev. The Indian deities/saints have been visiting it since thousands of years. Hence, it belongs to India. Kindly update the country as INDIA. THANK YOU Advocate Sonal Singh (talk) 15:28, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 15:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 August 2020

The translation into traditional Chinese characters is wrong. Someone in a cut-and-paste hurry added a character (equal sign) that is also the Chinese number two. That added character should be removed.

(Tibetan: གངས་རིན་པོ་ཆེ་; simplified Chinese: 冈仁波齐峰; traditional Chinese: =岡仁波齊峰). This is wrong. (Tibetan: གངས་རིན་པོ་ཆེ་; simplified Chinese: 冈仁波齐峰; traditional Chinese: 岡仁波齊峰). This is right. 2601:446:480:4E60:A42C:A24D:E5D1:29F4 (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 14:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Reoccupation by India

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has been stunned since India’s occupation of half a dozen strategic peaks such as Gurung Hill, Magar Hill, Mukherpari and Rechin-La Pass at the southern end of Pangong Lake because all these hills are Kailash Mountains range.

That is, in a way, India has taken the entire area of ​​60-70 km in its possession, on which China used to show eyes every time it threatened to stop the journey of Kailash Mansarovar.

Before the 1962 war from China, pilgrims used to go to Kailash Mansarovar from Demchok in Ladakh.

However, after the war, China illegally captured this route and closed the route of Kailash Mansarovar Yatra.

References

Mt Meru vs Mt Kailash

Even though Mount Kailash (Kailasa) is known as Mount Meru(Sumeru) in Buddhist texts, they are totally different as there is a 220km distance between them. In Buddhism, Mount Meru(Sumeru) is considered as the central world-mountain . The concept of Sumeru is closely related to the central Mount Meru of Hindu cosmology, but it differs from the Hindu concept in several particulars.

References

References for Pilgrimage section

Is the Pilgrimage section completely unsourced or merely missing inline references? Looks encyclopedic enough, but the lack of citations is disturbing. 202.8.114.133 (talk) 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Mount Meru [6] 176.65.96.155 (talk) 06:57, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Editing in response to banner of Feb 2022

Intend to provide verifiable references wherever needed and adding the content to article Anand2202 (talk) 18:13, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Height 22,028 feet

As on 31 July 2022, the height is mentioned as 21778 feet in the article.

Reasons for correction to 22,028 feet.

1. Try searching for peaks in Himalayan region over 22000 feet height - Mount Kailash is listed.
2. Finding earliest available publications using data mining techniques, one of the prominent book on Kailash Manasarovar written by Swami Pranavananda, published in 1949, has an account of all the Himalayan peaks with Mount Kailash mentioning 22,028 feet.
3. Britannica mentions 22,028 feet (6,714 metres)
4. Usually, google throws up Wikipedia article as first in results page. In all probability, modern sources have internet influence on data gathering. Information with 21,778 feet might be widespread because "Google says so" which in turn, is because "Wikipedia says so"

Trying to find more reliable and verifiable sources, pre-dating internet era, to authenticate the actual height.

Other editors can point out to such sources, if available. Anand2202 (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL SOURCE: National Geographic website mentions the height of Mount Kailash to be 6714 meters.

ADDITIONAL SOURCE: An article published in 2005, by India Today notes Peak Height to be 6,714m. Anand2202 (talk) 20:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL SOURCE : A 2003 article published in The New York Times mentions Kailash to be a 22,028-foot mountain. Anand2202 (talk) 21:04, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL SOURCE: One of the Travel Blog from Tibet associated with a Pioneer Travel Agency since 1984 also mentions altitude of Mt. Kailash to be 6714m in its blog post published in 2016 Anand2202 (talk) 21:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL SOURCE: A railway information website notes 6714 meter height Anand2202 (talk) 21:20, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

ADDITIONAL SOURCE: A 2019 post and a 2022 post published in Kailash Manasarovar Yatra facilitator websites mentions 6714 meter as height of Mount Kailash. Anand2202 (talk) 21:26, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that other sources consider this mountain to be somewhat lower and the reliance on the Britannica is not so good here. Remember that the Britannica insists that the Ulugh Muztagh is over 7700 meters tall, in the face of the Chinese mapping of 6970 meters and the 1985 first ascent group led by Robert Bates and Nicolas Clinch give 6,987 meters (which was supported by the Defence Mapping Agency in Washington DC). Other authorities such as Hartmut Bielefeldt cite 6638 meters https://www.bielefeldt.de/hoheberged5KH.htm. Frequently misquoted summit elevations page agrees with this and caltopo map does not support this summit reaching 22,000 ft.

Semi-protected edit request on 26 August 2022

I just need to remove a reference that is wrongly placed here. Planetinformatics.inc (talk) 05:51, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. MadGuy7023 (talk) 06:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 November 2022

Some one asked for citation needed for siva's son karthikeya's living in Kailasa. This is a ridiculous question as there are many thousands of hindu scripts say that Karthikeya is the son of Siva and Parvathi and they reside in Kailasa. One can quote scanda purana for many citations. Please remove the quote Deepakchinta (talk) 04:42, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The fact that potentially thousands of sources exist to support a claim is not sufficient reason to remove a {{Citation needed}} template. You are free to create a new edit request and provide a reliable source so that we may replace the template with one. —Sirdog (talk) 05:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Climate Change Claims for Mount Kailash

Exactly what are the Wiki scientific sources for the climate change statements made about Mt. Kailash? Rminusa (talk) 22:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Rminusa, the climate change section carries inline citations. You can go through them. Apandeyhp89 (talk) 13:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 October 2023

Please add the following text about the Panch Kailasha or five kailasha, ideally in the lede.

It is the most important peak among the group of five separate peaks in Himalayas in separate locations collectively known as the Panch Kailash or "Five Kailashas", other being Adi Kailash in  second, Shikhar Kailash in third, Kinnaur Kailash in fouth and Manimahesh Kailash in fifth place in terms of importance. Thank you. 111.223.76.187 (talk) 12:07, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

References

 Not done: It's not clear what it means with "important", it does not sound neutral and puffery is discouraged on wikipedia. WanderingMorpheme 02:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Pipe Shikhar Kailash to Shrikhand Mahadev

In the preceding edit suggested by me please wikilink/pipe the Shikhar Kailash to "Shrikhand Mahadev. 111.223.76.187 (talk) 13:05, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Elevation

I am a topographic researcher. Mount Kailash on my list of wrong elevations on my site at http://viewfinderpanoramas.org/elevmisquotes.html#kailash and I have complete confidence in my claim that my Chinese mapping source, which is based on official mapping by the Chinese military, is correct. The kind of sites that cited in support of 6714 metres are not topographic sites, and many of their heights are based on old, inaccurate and unreliable estimates that have been copied down. Many of these kind of sites still claim that Ulugh Muztagh is 7723 metres high. I have checked the Chinese heights against data derived from high resolution images from U.S. satellite data, and these data are clearly consistent with 6638 metres. I am willing to debate the issue but if there are no objections I will restore the elevation to 6638 metres. Viewfinder (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Listing this mountain as part of china

By listing this mountain as a part of China, this recognizes the illegal occupation of tibat, the very least, it should be noted that the mountain is in disputed territory. 160.2.226.42 (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Mention of Pilgrims

This article talks about pilgrims from china, inda, and, Nepal, but doesn't mention any from Tibet 160.2.226.42 (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Kayla (GI No. 1534001089) — Lake in Russia

Kayla (GKGN No. 0665852) — protoka, Republic of Bashkortostan; Kayla (GI No. 1812002617) — river, Amur region; Kayla (GI No. 1812003271) — river, Amur region; Kayla (GKGN No. 0186769) — river, Amur region; Kayla (GKGN No. 0591492) — river, Amur region; Kayla (tributary of Kitat) — river, Kemerovo region; Kayla (GI No. 1522002094) — river, Kemerovo region, Tomsk region; Kayla (GKGN No. 0266078) — river, Novosibirsk region;

Kayla (GKGN No. 0564367) — river, Republic of Khakassia; Kayla (GKGN No. 0381206) — river, Tomsk region;

Kayla (GI No. 1612001341) — river, Khakassia; Kayla (GI No. 1732000329) — river, Yakutia; Kayla (GKGN No. 0495486) — a stream, Republic of Sakha (Yakutia); Kayla (GKGN No. 0117095) — village, Kemerovo region; Kayla River, Kemerovo region (56.2333° S. 86.0667° V. D.: , GKGN No. 0490718); 176.65.96.41 (talk) 23:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2024

change circumbulated to circumambulated 50.46.168.171 (talk) 06:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done Left guide (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mount Kailash/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 09:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: TrangaBellam (talk · contribs) 12:13, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Unreliable sourcing

• I cast a glance at the sources used in the section on Hinduism and the lesser said, the better:

• Source 1 (Chandra;1998) is published by a publisher of barely any repute; I cannot find anything on the academic credentials of the author, either. ~40 citations for an "encyclopedia" in 25 years do not instill confidence.
• Source 2 (Sangha;2015) and 3 (Kaur;2021) are published by Lulu.com and Notion Press both of which are self-publishing platforms!
• Source 4 is a travel-blog from Times of India, a grossly poor source, and contains gems like "Tourists and pilgrims have discovered that the air of this ancient peak amps up the process of ageing!" and "[Mount Kailas] is the point where heaven meets earth. The Google Maps vouch for the validity of this fact."
• Source 5 (Rangaswamy;1958) is decent but too old.
• Source 6 (Wisdom Library;??) is a random website.
• Source 8 (New Indian Express;2022) might be a generic RS but not in the field of art history! Use peer-reviewed scholarship!
• Source 9 (News24; 2023) is some shady news website reporting about a podcast where people claimed to have met "nine-foot-tall transcendental entities" (!) at Mount Kailash!
• Source 10 (Nalangula;2022) is a one-page "research proposal" that claims the body of an epical character to have been preserved at Mount Kailash!
• Source 11 (Allen; 1978) is decent.
• Source 12 (Bora; 2020) is published by the college where he teaches and is (practically) self-published.

This article, as it stands, is about a dozen bargepoles away from meeting GA and there is little point in not quick-failing this nomination. Thanks, TrangaBellam (talk) 12:40, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Maintenance template

Hi! I believe that the issues raised have been addressed in order for the maintenance templates to be removed. Open for comments from others. Pinging @TrangaBellam as well as the original placer of the template. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:55, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

For one, it is ridiculous to claim that Vishnu Purana is from the 2nd century BCE and the tag will stay. TrangaBellam (talk) 08:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@TrangaBellam It has been addressed. Any other notable concerns apart from that? Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

As there have been no further comments on this for over a month and the issues indicated have already been addressed, removing the maintenance template. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 06:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 October 2024

change circumbulated to circumambulated Pwpig (talk) 09:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Changed. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 12:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)