Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Literature in the Hoysala Empire

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 22:29, 6 September 2008 [1].

Literature in the Hoysala Empire

edit
Nominator(s): Dineshkannambadi (talk)


I'm nominating this article for featured article because I believe it deserves a FA status. The article discusses an important period in the development of medieval Kannada literature. The article has completed a peer review by User:Ruhrfisch and User:Redtigerxyz and is well cited from reliable sources. MOS check was done by User:Epbr123 and copy edits by User:Michael Devore, User:Finetooth and User:Dank55. Image issues have been cleared by User:Elcobbola.

Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Blocks of references need to be in numerical order. I noticed quite a few out of order. Calor (talk) 03:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will take care of this. thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Looks to be a nice article on an obscure topic. I will be spending time reading through, but to indulge my curiosity more than anything. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hope you enjoy the read.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:45, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Sources look good. Links checked out with the link checker tool. Nice job! Ealdgyth - Talk 14:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on images

  • All images have correct licensing, descriptions, and sources.
  • All of the images in this article on the right-hand side of the article. The MOS recommends alternating images for the best visual layout. See MOS:IMAGES and WP:PICTURE for advice on placement of images. Awadewit (talk) 19:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Alternated images.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks better, I think. Awadewit (talk) 22:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's frustrating when reviewers contradict each other, but you might need to rethink some of the repositioning, as it has placed several left-aligned images under level 2 (===) headers. This is something that MOS:IMAGES explicitly says not to do, whereas the left-right stagger is merely something the MOS says you "can" do. Is it possible to find a staggered arrangement that does not place left-aligned images under lvl 2 headers? ЭLСОВВОLД talk 18:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have assumed you took care of this issue, seeing your edits. If not please do let me know. Thanks a lot.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, I just fixed mark-up stuff - no positioning. I assumed you'd know more about images' pertinence to the surrounding text; I didn't want to "wreck" anything. ;) ЭLСОВВОLД talk 12:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will look into this pretty soon.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Took the easy way out. Commented out temple images, kept inscription image.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support My issue fixed, no other issues raised, reads very nicely. Great job, Dineshkannambadi. Comment Please take a look at [2]. Once that's taken care of, I'll support.  Mm40 (talk | contribs)  12:17, 23 August 2008 (UTC)  Mm40 (talk | contribs)  17:50, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Provided disambig links. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see some things I missed while copyediting the lead and the first two subsections; tidying up now. I still need more when I read "Writers bilingual in Kannada and Telugu were given encouragement, which caused interaction between the two languages, a trend that has remained popular even in modern times". What encouragement? What interaction? What trend? I'd prefer to see either less or more. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 02:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some writers who were adept in both Kannada and Telugu languages were very popular from the Hoysala period onwards. For instance, Palkuriki Somanatha, a writer in Kannada, Telugu and Sanskrit was one of the foremost writers of the 12-13th century and was responsible for many works that propagated the Veerashaiva faith in multiple languages. The Veerashaiva movement started in the Kannada speaking region of South India under the leadership of Basava. This multi-linguality helped redefine the readership boundaries across different regions within South India. Hence the usage of the term "encouragement". "Interaction" between literatures of Kannada and Telugu was much more than usage of words and terms from one language (Kannada in this case) in the literature of another (Telugu). The Akkara metre ( a native metre) which is considered peculiar to Kannada has been found in very early Telugu writings and inscriptions as well. Even non-bilingual poets were patronised across linguistic boundaries. For example, Hoysala poet Raghavanka, though a Kannada-only poet and whose famous works have been described in this article was honoured by Kakatiya King Prataparudra I. The Kakatiya's are a Telugu dynasty from the eastern parts of South India. This would not have been possible if literature in Kannada were not read and appreciated in Telugu speaking regions. There are examples to quote Telugu poets who were honoured by Kannada kings too. By "trend" I meant that the practice of not only writing original literature but also translations and adaptations from Kannada to Telugu and vice versa has remained popular into modern times. (Narasimhacharya, 1988, p. 27,28, 68).Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:29, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could add a lot or a little of that. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 11:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Will do.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will take care of this later today.thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Hope this is a better description.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 00:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with the first half of this article, so if Finetooth will support the last half, I'll Support. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 21:12, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • The first sentence is odd. A large body of literature in the Kannada and Sanskrit languages survives from the Hoysala Empire. ????? The first line should introduce and the subject at hand, begin positively not talk about surviving literature. You can begin by introducting the Hoysala empire and their reign, and immediately mentioning literature patronage in the second sentence.
    • Thanks, you're right, it was vaguely negative. I tried to address your concern and comply with WP:LEAD. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
      • The lead used to be like this–Literature in the Hoysala Empire refers to a body of literature composed in Kannada and Sanskrit languages during the ascendancy of the Hoysala Empire, which lasted from the 11th through the mid-14th century. I can change it back if so desired.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • A claim has been -- by whom?
    • Dinesh, Belur Keshavadasa made the claim. Per WP:WEASEL, what you want to do is give the reader a clue why you believe this guy...it can be as short as "noted historian Belur Keshavadasa asserts [or suggests or whatever]..." If you believe this because a lot of people said it, not just this one guy, then say that and we'll figure out how to comply with WEASEL. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
      • DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC). I do not want to qualify Belur Keshavasada as either a historian or Bhakti scholar since the reference book remains silent on the issue, but the fact that the Sahitya Akademi panel has referred to his book says it all.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done. Found from google search that Belur Keshavadasa is a 20th century Harikatha scholar and authored a book called Haridasa Sahitya, Mysore, Harimandira, 1944. His name also come us in newspaper articles.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is structure of Kannada used?
  • considered by D. R. Nagaraj -- you need to mention the authority of person to say so. Is he a historian, archaeologist, poet etc?
    • I browsed the book that refers to his research, but it does not provide me with info such as historian or epigraphist etc. It does tell me that Nagraj headed in some capacity the Literary Culture study group.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In addition to the Hoysala patronage, royal...its literature. Can be summarised in one sentence. The "wide geographic" details are not needed. use terms like neighbouring.
    • If it's clear that the paragraph is talking about the spread of the Kannada language, then one sentence isn't too much, I think. We might want to fiddle with the focus of the paragraph. If this were an article on the origins of English literature, I don't think it would be out of place to give evidence that nobles in, say, Wessex and Wales and Edinborough were supporting the language in some way (I don't know if this is true, but it would be relevant). - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
      • Done I have changed the wording to neighbouring kingdoms. If you feel there is no need to mention the names of the kingdoms, I can move that into the inline quote.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are several poets and writers from this period whose... -- sentence starts negatively. Begin with the court records, and then mention why most is unavailable.
    • I can't tell what you want; can you suggest a sentence that combines the first two sentences? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 12:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • wasted little time -- unencyclopedic tone
  • which caused interaction between the two languages, -- what is meant by this? How about exchange of ideas? If so, what is the influence of Telegu on Kannada?
    • I stumbled on that when I first read it, too. This is meant to be a topic sentence; the paragraph describes the interaction in detail. It's more than an exchange of ideas. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
  • I see subtle mention of influences of Tamil, Sanskrit and Telegu, but its not explicitly mentioned in the text. Literature and language are usually heavily influenced by other languages. Are there some sources you can use to mention its influence?
    • In discussion. Normally, from what I understand, influence of one language on another is proportional to some factors; Seniority (as in Sanskrit literature being a clear senior to Kannada literature, but the reverse influence is also evident to some extent in the post Hoysala period), Socio-religious developments (Vaishnava, Veerashaiva movements) and political (conquests and imperialism). If a religious movement originated in Kannada speaking regions (such as Veerashaiva) and later spread to the Telugu speaking regions, the influence of Kannada on Telugu Veerashaiva literature would become a natural process. This is why Velchuru Narayana Rao (another expert on literary cultures, referred to by Sheldon Pollock) mentions that Telugu literature is heavily influenced by Sanskrit (general overall Kavya influence), Tamil (Vaishnava canon) and Kannada (Veerashaiva canon). However, let us consider the case of Tamil and Kannada. Tamil literature is accepted to be senior to Kannada literature by some number of centuries. But for about 1650 years, ever since the advent of the first native Kannada kingdoms (Kadambas) these two regions have been political competitors. According to Kamath and Narasimhacharya, the influence of Tamil and Kannada on each other is minimal though it is postulated by some that the Tamil Alwars of 7th-9th century did influence the Kannada Haridasas' in the 15-16th centuries, a period/topic that is outside the scope of this article. This minimal interaction, according to Kamath is also because of geographic barriers (Eastern Ghats) when he says free from encroachments of Tamil language. Sanskrit has however influenced every Indian language to varying degrees. But here we are talking about 1100-1350 period during which it is generally accepted that Sanskrit took a back stage to local languages (Kannada to be specific. Pollock has written a book called Death of Sanskrit...). In fact, I do mention in the lead itself that most of the textual production was in Kannada and that the switch from Sanskritic metres to local metres happened during this period. So that clarifies that beginning this period, the influnece of Sanskrit was, if anything, on the wane. So that brings us to Kannada-Telugu interaction. While the interaction started with Kannada works being adapted into Telugu, the high point of the influence going the other way, is only from the 15th century Vijayanagara rule onwards. In fact, the geographic boundaries of the two languages sort of blurred to such as extent that the noted 15th century Telugu writer Srinatha, called his Telugu, "Kannada" (Narasimhacharya (1988), pp. 27–28). I have also mentioned the later influence of Telugu on Kannada in the para before the last, in the "Overview" section. May be I should word it better. This topic is a tough one, because of the inherent "chicken and egg".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:53, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I other words, its easlier to size up the influence of one language on another over an extended period of time, say 1000 years, instead of a mere 250 years.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The support of the Hoysala rulers for the Kannada language was strong --> Active voice: The Hoysala rulers patronised Kannada...
    • Finetooth (maybe) objected to "patronised", I think because of its various meanings, and I agree. And btw, this isn't passive voice. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 12:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • is called the "Augustan age" of --> by whom? Historians? Media? etc
    • Dinesh, I think the best way to deal with this is to add details on who says this and why if it seems important, that is, if some might disagree. On the assumption that there's no real disagreement on what to call the period, I combined the two sentences. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
      • Done. Noted scholar on Kannada literature and its evolution, R. Narasimhacharya.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • old Jain tradition of using the champu metre -- need to expand on this. What is champu and how is the ragale metre different? Similarly, sangatya and shatpadi should also have a mention.
    • This explanation exists in the last para of the lead. If more explanation is needed, it would be easy to add a paragraph without too much effort.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • perhaps the most famous scholar --> perhaps might be a weasel term
    • Just to clarify, Dinesh, some of us regret the name of the guideline ("Avoid weasel words"): it sounds like people are doing something particularly slimy when they're not (usually!), and it sounds carved in stone when it's definitely not. One approach to try would be "a great scholar"; another approach (but most people don't like this) would be to add a footnote clarifying what you mean and what the support is for this position; another approach would be to move this person into his own sentence where you can give that explanation and justification for the claim. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
      • Done. Removed "perhaps the most famous" and just made it "court poet". One has to be famous to become a court poet.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trailblazers????? -- I did not get the context
  • The Hoysala map would be a good addition to gauge the extent of influence.

=Nichalp «Talk»= 06:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

    • Done. The current Hoysala map only shows their "core" political influence, but I think there is a map that generally shows the extent of Hoysala and Seuna empires in the 13th century. As far as the Silharas of Kholapur and Southern Kalachuris are concerned, it gets more complicated. The Silharas were generally subordinates of the W. Chalukyas and later the Seunas. The Hoysalas themselves were subordinates of Chalukyas for a while (up to about 1180). The Kalachuris existed as an independent entity in Karnataka for only 30 years or so (and what a glorious 30 years it was for Kannada poetry!!). In short, putting a map togather that includes them all would be a tall order. Hope the map I have introduced is sufficient. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for your review, Nichalp, very helpful! - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 13:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My review was done in a hurry, so I did not check for typos or grammar above. I'll just clarify one sentence that you asked:
There are several poets and writers from this period whose writings have not come down to us. Most but not all of the information about these writers comes from records of the Hoysala court. can be rephrased to something like this: Most of the extant literature today come from Hoysala court records. Other poets and writers from this period have not survived. Its on the choppy side, and needs more context, but that's what I was trying to basically convey. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done I have reworded that sentence. Most of the extant literature today come from Hoysala court records would not be accurate because the Kannada literature thrived in the Chalukya court till about 1150 and is available, and the Kalachuri period (1155-1189) was a glorious era of extant Kannada poetry.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have a question about "medieval" (Kannada literature), which you use above and also in the article. Mwos says that the word "medieval" means the period in Europe from roughly 500 to roughly 1500. There was no "medieval" period in China, for instance. Is the word used much among literate Indians to refer to a period in their history, and if so, what period? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 14:07, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • P.S. I get 50K ghits for "medieval Chinese" ... enough that I can't say "no one ever says that", but I would never use that phrase myself. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 20:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have seen some variety in usage w.r.t Kannada literature.
        • Historian Shiva Prakash calls 9-11th century as ancient, 12th-17th century as medieval and 18th onwards as modern, basee on the style of Kannada and the language used.
        • Steever S.B.(1998): "The language shows three historically distinct stages: Old Kannada dates from 450 CE to 1200, Middle Kannada from 1200 CE to 1700, and Modern Kannada from 1700 to the present". He includes the 450-850 period, when Kannada epigraphs gained in popularity, as the Old period.
        • Krishnamurti (2003), p. 23; Pollock (2007), p. 81; Sahitya Akademi, Encyclopaedia of Indian Literature, vol. 2 (1988), p. 1717. (Quote: "The language of the Halmidi inscription, pre-old Kannada, later evolved into Old Kannada, Middle Kannada, and later Modern Kannada." So here 5th century Halmidi inscription is considered pre-old Kannada.
        • Other scholars see it purely from a Indian historical view point. Narasimhacharya and K.A.N. Sastri divide it into Jain period (from the earliest known works to 12th century), from 13-15th century as Veerashaiva period and thereafter as Veerashaiva + Vaishnava period, based on social trends and popularity.

So, the period under consideration in this article falls right in the Mwos period.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but I'm not sure if you get what I'm saying. According to MWOS, which is one of the authorities for most American journalists, "medieval" means "of the Middle Ages", and "Middle Ages" means "the period of European history from about a.d. 500 to about 1500". Just like you wouldn't say "the Han dynasty period in French history", because France isn't in China, it might not make sense to say "medieval" in relation to India, but you would know better than I would. This isn't just some dry question of definitions: there are many people who are offended by defining the world and its history completely in terms of what was happening in Europe at the time. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 20:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I understand now. If you can point me to where "medieval" is used in the article, I can consider adding a bracketed disambiguation and explain that it is from the Old/middle Kannada period, so as not to offend anyone. This is again a tough issue. In the Eastern world, the classification is often based on styles, metres, social movements etc. For example, consider Raghavanka's classic Harichchandra Kavya dated to about 1200 (and hence from the old Kannada/medieval period) in which the author established the native Shatpadi metre. I have mentioned this in the article. But the earliest mention of Shatpadi is from Nagavarma's extant 990 romance classic Karnataka Kadambari written in champu style (from the so called classical period and classical style). So Shatpadi existed in Kannada in the 10th century, except no works in that metre are available from that period. So here to one could argue that Raghavanka's work uses a metre that originated(?) in the so called classical period though it was written in the Old-Kannada period. This list with similar examples can quickly grow, ofcourse.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They're both in Age of Harihara. However, two of your references have "medieval" in the title, so maybe it's fine, I don't know. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 21:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. "Medieval" is a term that is used routinely in Indian historiography. Sarvagnya 18:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I changed one to "Hoysala era" and left the other as is. Adding a disambig may or maynot help.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:23, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Great read! Sarvagnya 18:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Okay, I'm going to continue copyediting where I left off, at Age of Harihara. User:Finetooth copyedited from here down and generally did a fine job; I have just a few comments.

  • "physically abused" is one of those "Whaaa?" phrases. Did he hit him over the head with a stick? Did he beat him day and night? The phrase asks more questions than it answers. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
    • According to legend, Harihara, the guru, abused Raghavanka who lost five teeth in the process!! (Sahitya Akademi). To expiate the sin of offending his master, he wrote five classics, one for each fallen tooth, in the Veerashaiva tradition of "not" eulogising mere mortals, but only saintly Veerashiavas. I felt it is better not to go into details of the legend and kept to Pollock's "abused" wording. I can change the wording if you like.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'd prefer if you say that he struck him, or you can be more descriptive. "Physically abused" might imply a long-term abusive relationship to some readers. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess I don't care enough to change them all, but when you mention both an author and a specific work, it would be better to put the date after the work rather than after the author. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
  • "The last two works are considered lost" I don't follow. Are the works lost? Are most of the words lost? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
    • Done. The entire writings are lost. clarified this with usage of "classics".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in the 1217–1235 time frame" if we know it was between 1217 and 1235 inclusive, then it's better to say so; "time frame" generally implies fuzziness. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
  • Both "the god Vishnu" and "Vishnu" are fine; "god Vishnu" is not. If you feel pretty sure your readers know that Vishnu is a god, it's fine to say just "Vishnu", so you may want to change some of my edits. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive)
  • I've changed my mind on patronised; you use it a lot, and it's fine.
  • After you've had a chance to look at this stuff, I can support (with caveats). - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 19:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with caveats: I generally don't do endsections or images, and I don't know anything about this subject. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Beginning with the 12th century, important socio-political changes took place in the southern Deccan. - Are you trying to point at the southern part of Deccan or the entire deccan. If its the first one, then context for Deccan is missing.
  • LEAD first line. You have put literature last and Hoysala Empire first. I think the empire should be mentioned last.
Can you suggest a sentence? I've tried 3 different sentences already. - Dan

Dank55 (send/receive) 19:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you mention: The Literature in the Hoysala Empire has produced some great Kannada and Sanskrit works like blah blah. Kensplanet (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dinesh, what do you like? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 20:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I feel its better to write: writers and poets produced great works rather than the literature itself producing great works. But, thinking about it again, I dont see anything wrong if one views literature from the point of view of a "literary movement" which would produce great works. I initially generalised it (before copy edits began) that the "period of ascendancy of the Hoysala empire produced important writings". In short, this can be said in various ways, just a matter of choice.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is what was there earlier and we can go back to this version-Literature in the Hoysala Empire refers to a body of literature composed in Kannada and Sanskrit languages during the ascendancy of the Hoysala Empire, which lasted from the 11th through the mid-14th century. This is more like Kenplanet's version. Shall I switch to this version?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I asked at WT:FAC. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dvaita in LEAD 2nd para needs to be italicized. Kensplanet (talk) 19:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 01:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Was it italicized because it's a non-English word? Why italicize just this one and not the others? I'm not sure, but I think if an article is full of terms from another language, they tend not to be italicized...I'll ask around. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Okay, I asked around, and the level of italics you have in the article (for non-English words) is fine. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 18:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I will deal with all these issue later tonight.thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dern it, Kensplanet is right in the sense that the advice not to italicize most links (unless they're titles) keeps dropping out of WP:MOS and WP:ITALICS. I'll go get this fixed in the guidelines. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 20:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, this one As in earlier centuries, Jain authors wrote about tirthankars (saints), princes and other personages important to the Jain religion. tirthanakars here...is it necessary to mention tirthankars here. Kensplanet (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, the refered books repeatedly use the term Tirthankar and good majority of the Jain writings are about their lives. E.P. Rice even lists the writer, time, book and Tirthankar in [[3]].Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In his book Karnataka Bhaktavijaya, Belur Keshavadasa, a noted Harikatha scholar, claimed that the movement was inspired by saint Achalananda Dasa of Turvekere (in the modern Tumkur district) in the 9th century - I think this looks better Belur Keshavadasa, a noted Harikatha scholar, in his book Karnataka Bhaktavijaya claimed that........ Reason being there are already 2 or 3 authors mentioned above this line. It looks like they have written the book. Kensplanet (talk) 20:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I peer reviewed this as noted and felt it was close to FA then, I find the copyedits and changes since have only improved the article. I am not an expert on the period or its literature, but I think this meets the FA criteria. I always like to see zero red links in an article at FAC, but that is not an actionable request, just a suggestion. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Great article about literature in an ancient empire. Also, Please modify the first line of the lead.Kensplanet (talk) 05:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked about the first sentence at WT:FAC#Quick opinion on lead sentence?. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 12:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does anyone else see a large empty space to the right of the "Kannada poets" graphic?

Comments: Excellent article. Couple of quick points:

  • The last sentence of the lead para seems to suggest that Madhvacharya was a member of the the Hoysala court. I was a little surprised to read this, because I haven't ever heard this to be the case. Am I misinterpreting the sentence or was Madhva infact part of the Hoysala court?
    • No, Madhva was never part of any court. This is why I mentioned "monastic" literature implying it was written in a monastery. perhaps I can reword it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are a few sentences about the impact of Hoysala literature on the literature of Vijayanagara, when Karnataka and S. India in general reached a peak not since seen. There's mention of Vaishnava poetry and the influences Madhva and Vidhyatirtha. Are there any stylistic elements in prose or poetry that were first used in Hoysala literature that became major influences in Vijayanagara literature? Also, would there be enough material to construct a separate paragraph to close out the article by detailing Hoysala literature's influences on future Kannada dynasties? Thanks AreJay (talk) 03:54, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see your point and I will try to give an answer later tonight. Thinking from the top of my head, the establishment of shatpadi and ragale metres in Kannada literature (native metres) led to the virtual dethronement of Sanskritic Champu in the Vijayanagara period. In fact, the Vijayanagara period went on to become the age of Shatpadi bringing Kannada courtly literature into the realm of "folk literature", in all three types of literatures; Vaishnava, Veerashaiva and even the Jaina literatures. Dasa Sahitya was directly influenced by Madhva's philosophy and was written in sangatya, another native metre. Interestingly, the very revolutionary Veerashaiva folk poetry that "errupted" into popularity in the northern Karnataka region was translated into Sanskrit bringing it into the Sanskritic order (something unthinkable in the 12th century socio-politically charged atmosphere).Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I will be done with this last section today. Thanks for your patience. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anybody there? This article has had an inuse template on it for 24 hours. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:40, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • yes, I will be done in the next hour or so.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done I have added a section on "post Hoysala period" and requested Dan55 to copy edit it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • On it. If there was a period known widely as the "post-Hoysala period" (it needs a hyphen, because "post" isn't a word, or at least not in that sense), then that's fine. If not, and you just want to refer to the time after the Hoysalas, then maybe we can go with "Literature after the Hoysalas" for the section name, unless some notable Hoysalas were still around; were they? "After the Hoysalas" is not as good because WP:MOS prefers noun phrases. "1400 – 1600" is a possibility because WP:MOS says not to repeat elements from the title in section headings when possible; on the other hand, people often don't read articles linearly, and I'm concerned that since the article is about the Hoysala empire, someone will assume that's a period in the Hoysala empire if we don't give them a better clue. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, no problems found. I'm not sure what this means: "bringing it into the sphere of the Sanskritic ... cultural order". If you think the typical reader of this article will understand this, then it's fine. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 02:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Literature_in_the_Hoysala_Empire&oldid=1138465840"