Talk:Parsurameswara Temple
 | Parsurameswara Temple has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: July 23, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
 | A fact from Parsurameswara Temple appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 August 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Parsurameswar Temple/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hamiltonstone (talk · contribs) 13:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Generally excellent article. It is neutral, stable, and fairly comprehensive. Images are appropriately licenced. I have copyedited it where i was clear about the intended meaning. Other points:
- At one point we have "the sanctum, called vimana," and at another "The sanctum (garbhagriha)". It can't be both - something needs fixing.
- I have removed garbhagriha to make it consistent.
- "the walls are mottled by portions" - what?? Neither the use of "mottled" nor "portions" makes sense here. Can someone check this out?
- rephrased
- Final section has "...prove the existence of Natyasastra tradition during the times." There need to be at least a few words explaining what this tradition is - a wikilink is not sufficient. Also specify during which times.
- Good point - I had a wrong denotion here - it was Devadasi tradition, whose existence is insisted. I have rephrased the section.
I think that's it. hamiltonstone (talk) 13:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for taking up the review. Let me fix the items quoted.Ssriram mt (talk) 16:09, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Please let me know for further comments.Ssriram mt (talk) 17:35, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- I think that's it. Thank you for the prompt responses. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
External links modified edit
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Parashurameshvara Temple. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140309214746/http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2009/September/engpdf/101-105.pdf to http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2009/September/engpdf/101-105.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140309214753/http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2008/Sept-Octo-2008/engpdf/1-3.pdf to http://orissa.gov.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/2008/Sept-Octo-2008/engpdf/1-3.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:02, 17 January 2016 (UTC)