Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:30, 17 December 2007

Western Chalukya architecture

I'm nominating this article for featured article because the Western Chalukya architecture is an important step in the development of South Indian architecture. The Western Chalukya architecture of 11th and 12th centuries is considered a conceptual link between the 8th century architecture of the Badami Chalukyas and the 12th / 13th century Hoysala architecture. This temple building style flourished in medieval Karnataka in southern India. The topic is well referenced and cited and is on the same lines as the earlier FA, Hoysala architecture. Please provide constructive feedback on format, grammar and presentation that would help make this a FA.

thanks, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Why is the "A" capitalized in the article title? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:00, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply I just started that way. If it is an issue, I can move the article and make it lower case.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 03:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done. Article title modified. - KNM 17:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Redtigerxyz

• Support Comment: As requested by Dineshkannambadi, moved my comments from article talk page here, I have not gone through the whole article yet and may have some more comments to add tomorrow. Also, I will also make minor edits to the article, whereever neccessary IMO.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 17:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
• {{fact}} tags added in article

 Done. DK Added citations. Rectified sentences where applicable. Sometimes the meaning changes unintentionally during cpedits.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Added more.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Can the "Chaturmukha" image be brightened. The shadow is the most prominent thing in the photo.Else i suggest, it be removed.

DK This image is considered unique and only second in workmanship to the famous Saraswati image in Gadag (Cousens, p78, 1926). Thats the reason I added the image. I will change the image to a Jain tirthankar which is clearer, if you insist.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC) I have added the image of the Jaina also.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:51, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, it may be the most beautiful piece, but whats the point in keeping it when it blocked by a huge shadow? My suggestion: Brighten it or remove it. About the other Image - Jain tirthankar in "Temple Deities", the same murti can be seen in "Early developments" Image:Door Panel Decoration JainTemple at Lakkundi.JPG, thus a case of WP:UNDUE. So one of them should be removed, Preferably the one in "Temple Dieties" be removed as the other one shows the murti as well as Door panel decoration. Update the image heading of Image:Door Panel Decoration JainTemple at Lakkundi.JPG in "Early developments" documenting the fact the temple diety is also seen.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done updated image caption, removed repeat image.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• I will try the brightening up myself.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
• Can someone fix the tilt in Image:Door Panel Decoration JainTemple at Lakkundi.JPG.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• In Temple Deities, "The temple has two other shrines dedicated to Murthinarayana and Chandraleshwari, the parents of Mahadeva, the Chalukya commander who consecrated the temple in 1112 CE" The 2 commas make the meaning not so WP:OBVIOUS.

DK  Done rectified.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• "Examples of Hindu temples dedicated to deities other than Shiva or Vishnu are the Surya (called Suryanarayana) shrine at the Kasi Visvesvara" Is the temple called Suryanarayana shrine or Suryanarayana, the other name of Surya, is quoted?

DK  Done I have corrected this. The Surya is portrayed as Suryanarayana. Hence its still Surya, the Sun god.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Isn't Janardana, a name of Vishnu? Thus the temple is probably dedicated to Vishnu. Check who the main diety is. Challenging "Examples of Hindu temples dedicated to deities other than Shiva or Vishnu are ... the Janardana and Durga Temples at Hirekerur in the Haveri district". The ref does not say so. Thus OR IMO.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply  Done I have rectified this. Yes, Janardhana is indeed a form of Vishnu. However, the other temples mentioned are clearly neither Shaiva (dedicated to Shiva) or Vaishnava (dedicated to Vishnu). I can remove it if you feel the sentence is unnecessary, though.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Is 'Dravida' same as the Dravida of the this wiki article or is it an architectural term?If former applies, link the article.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply The term Dravida style of architecture means architecture that developed in Southern India, distinguishing it from the Nagara style of Northern India (which itself is sub-divided into Kalinga etc based on region, and latina, Sekhari, Bhumija based on shapes of towers). Here Dravida is a general term and a broad Southern classification within which scholars use terms such as Pure Dravida (as in the some temples of Pattadakal and those at Mahabalipuram), Karnata Dravida - the variant that developed in Karnataka region and so on. The Dravida article tends to focus on linguistic groups (which is better accepted) and racial classifications (which as you may know is very controversial). However, one can broadly tie all these classifications together and call it Dravida or South Indian. Instead of linking it to Dravida article, maybe I should just provide a bracketed explanation and call it Dravida (meaning South Indian). What do you think?.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC) In fact this explanation already exists in the "Evolution" section in the very begining. Scholars do classify dravida generally as southern Indian.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• At the moment, Dravida redirects to Dravidian people. Maybe something like: Dravida (south Indian), may be added at first occurence. Also sometimes dravida is spelt with a capital "D" (Dravida) , sometimes as lower case. Dravida (if proper noun) or dravida (if common) - one standard form be used. Most of article uses dravida. But IMO, it is a proper noun as it refers to an unique style of architecture. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 16:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply Ok. Will do. I will take care of the other concerns also tonight.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply I have made dravida lower case, provided (south Indian) and (north Indian) bracketed explanation for first appearence of the terms dravida and nagara respectively.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• I am adding link to Dravidian architecture, which a suitable link for Dravida style of architecture.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• Is singular and plural of Mandapa same or is the plural Mandapas? Please Check. "On occasion there can be two or more open mantapa." in Basic layout.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply mantapas is ok and is used in Kamath (2001), p116.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• Drammatic overuse of phrase "The best example(s) of" or just "the best" or another variant "The finest examples of". . The article has many instances when a feature is discussed then you have "the best example of" X, Y, Z temples. The repetitive nature of the article makes reading a little boring (If I may say so) after a while. Needs to a copyedit to eliminate this.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done DK Reply I have cpedited this repetitive phrase out, for most part.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• "The best examples of this style are the Muktesvara Temple at Chavudayyadanapura in Haveri district, which was renovated in the 13th century and whose vimana can be best described as sharp and tidy" in Unique plans - who describes the vimana as sharp and tidy? If a personal view, it should be removed.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply I have modified the sentence slightly and provided citation.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 03:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I will go through whole article again and then only strike this out. Not now, Maybe in the evening. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• "during this era remain as examples of the Chalukyan architectural style, the finest examples of which are " in lead. "examples of" repeated twice. The word "example" 5 times in lead.
• "example(s) of" thrice in last para - "Temple Dieties".
• "example(s) of" thrice in "Unique Plans"--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:53, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done DK Reply I have taken care of this issue now.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• There is no info in text form about Stepped well (pictured).

Dk Reply Yes unfortunately, none of the books I own describe the stepped wells. But a recent book published by Gerard Foekema "Architecture of Indian subcontinent" has a few lines on it which i have lined to in citation 47.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• That raises another issue: I observed that some pictures are placed with no reference in the text, looking out of place. Examples: The Image:Sculpture at Siddhesvara temple at Haveri.JPG is more revelant in Sculpture than in Temple Deities. While the Jain Tirthankar should be in Temple deities. etc. I suggest a rearrangement of pics so that placed "where they are appropriate to the subject." (WP:FA?) --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:20, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done movd images.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• The windows of Manikesvara Temple (pictured) not discussed in text. The temple finds mention only in the list at the end.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Challenging "Unique Plans" title. Is it really unique - Being only one of its self ? Can it be referenced that the plans are really unique? else it may be a violation of WP:NPOV (a glorification of the subj).--Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:29, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply Yes, the 16 pointed and 24 pointed uniterrupted plans are isolated cases in India. All stellate plans (according to the author) in north India are the 32 pointed interrupted type, making the 16 and 24 pointed ones unique. However, so as not to draw undue attention to this issue, I have changed the title of that section which has all the citations needed. I can however add more if you so desire. thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• The {{KarnatakaHistory}} looks out of place in Architectural elements. The template be placed elsewhere or removed.

 Done Dk Reply Moved to a less conspicuous location.Dineshkannambadi 03:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

• Why has the {{Western Chalukya Temples}} template been created if it is to be used for 1 article? Just incorporate whole code in the article. Thats makes editing the article simple. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply Here, I request that the template be maintained. This is consistant with all other FA's I wrote. Some reviewers frown upon a "list" of temples and discourage lists. I either created a template for temples in architecture articles or a template for Kings in regular history articles. I want to expand this template and include more temples, further provide date of consecration, kings who commissioned it, may be even a column for articulation style etc (dravida, nagara). This way I can keep all details in one template and link from there to subarticles.Dineshkannambadi 03:16, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply I will look into this.thanks Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply I will look into your questions and concerns later today.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 17:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Though 2 small things to be done, those do not stop me supporting a great article and I trust Dineshkannambadi will resolve it too. IMO, now; the article is almost "WP:PERFECT". The word "almost" is included as perfection "is not attainable. Editing may bring an article closer to perfection, but ultimately, perfection means different things to different Wikipedians".--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. The article has a lot of images relative to the amount of text. It makes me wonder whether we need a new category of articles that are more strongly based around images. Samsara (talk • contribs) 06:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply Every image in the article is directly related to an architectural element or development that has been described in the article. I can reduce the images but find another reviewer suggest that the number the images are insufficient. Also, the number of images is consistant with my other architecture related FA.thanksDineshkannambadi 15:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments by User:Tony1

• Oppose—Improved writing; "small- star" errant space; huge white space in "Notable temples: PLEASE fix! Can't the images go to the side of the table? En dash for year range at top of table. Oh, and en dashes for page ranges in the reference list. Tony (talk) 02:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)1a. Long sentences, often complicated in structure, and redundant wording. Here are a few random examples from the top.
• "Large and small temples built during this era remain as examples of the Chalukyan architectural style, well known among which are including the Mahadeva Temple at Itagi in the Koppal district, the Kasivisvesvara Temple at Lakkundi in the Gadag district, the Mallikarjuna Temple at Kuruvatti and the Kallesvara Temple at Bagali, both in the Davangere district." It's a longish sentence with an awkward bit in the middle (well-known, please).

 Done DK Reply reduced sentence length.Dineshkannambadi 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• "The influence of this style is seen up to the Kalyani region and beyond in the north-east, in the Bellary region in the east, in the Mysore region in the south, and in the Bijapur-Belgaum region in the north, where they mix with the remnants of the Hemadpanti temples." What does "they" refer to? What is being mixed?

 Done DK Reply clarified and broke into multiple sentences.Dineshkannambadi 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Caption: "11th c. CE"—c. means "about". You'll have to spell it out.

 Done DK Reply spelled it out as "century". The exact date of consecratin of a few monuments is debated based on inscriptional evidence. So even historians simply give the 11th century/12th century rather then exact date.Dineshkannambadi 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• "Though Western Chalukya architecture identifies as an independent tradition by virtue of the various modifications attained by its builders, closer examination reveals that its basic plan can be traced back to the older pure dravida (south Indian) temple plans that developed simultaneously in the 6th and 7th centuries in the Karnataka and Tamil Nadu regions, then under the control of the Badami Chalukyas and Pallava empires respectively." Phew. "Although" is nicer in a formal register. Replace "identifies as" with just "was". Remove "various". "Attained" is strange here. Remove "closer examination reveals that", which is not quite necessary here, is it?

 Done DK Reply corrected per above advice and reduced sentence length somewhat.Dineshkannambadi 17:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• "Study ... has revealed ..."—This is a bit laboured when you give the reference anyway. Why not just state it? "In the W C style, there is/was a distinct ..." I don't know; it's kind of complicated to unravel and simplify, but someone must do it. I'm getting confused about was/is, style/building. Avoid repetitions such as "architectural" in the one phrase. What is "articulation"—link or explain on first occurrence.

Is user Fowler&fowler still around? Or Samir? They might agree to help. Tony (talk) 04:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply the meaning of articulation (according to the scholars referenced) is given in the section "Temple complexes" and subsection "Basic layout" and goes like this, Ornamental components forming patterns that include the whole of the shrine such as projections and recesses of the outer wall are considered as architectural articulation.

 Done DK Reply I have reduced usage of "architectural" term, chopped many long sentences into smaller ones, explained "articulation" on first occurance. Will continue to improve the article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply I will look into these issues as well as others that may exist.Dineshkannambadi 12:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply I will continue to look for long winding sentences, complicated sentences and simplyfy it.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 17:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Support - A well-referenced, interesting article which we have come to expect from dinesh.Bakaman 04:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Strong Support - Meets FA criteria. Well-written, and well-cited with ample images. "Architectural elements" section might require some minor alignments regarding images. Overall, very impressive work. - KNM 17:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Strong support - Well referenced and meets FA criteria. Naveen 12:55, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Strong support- Another beautiful FA from Dineshkannambadi, well referenced and meets the FA criterias. Amartyabag 07:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose Huge whitespace in "Notable temples" section. I see a few wordy phrases ("are known to be"..."it is considered"..."it is known"), POV ("well known among them"..."an indicator of the prolific temple building activity"...""..."undoubtedly an important seat, if not the main seat") and weasel words (""may have been influenced by""..."it seems that"). But it's good enough for GA. --Kaypoh (talk) 05:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply I will look into your concerns shortly. However, it would be appreciated if you could point out which sentences you see these "phrases" in. As far as blank space, is there a wiki policy on that? I am not sure. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 12:22, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply I have corrected several weasel words, wordy phrases etc. If you have any more concerns, please indicate the entire sentence and how you want it re-worded.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 01:54, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

• Disappointed to find a glitch in the first sentence: "between the 11th and the 12th centuries". "about fifty monuments have survived to date" "their style mixes is mixed with the". "These vanished structures"—ungrammatical. Now if these are just random pick-ups in the lead, there must be an awful lot in the rest. Tony (talk) 15:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done Dk Reply I have taken care of these examples you have shown and will continue to cpedit and improve the article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Dk Reply I will look into this right away. I will also request an experienced copy editor to help me with this.thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done DK Reply I have requested another user, not connected with the article to do a copy edit and improve prose. thanks.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

 Done DK Reply I would like to thank user:Writtenright, user:Michael Devore and user:Epbr123 for their copy edits and spelling checks to improve the prose in this article.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Spelling variants

Here are a few spelling variations I found when looking through the article on the first passes. I'll try to do another couple of passes later today.

• Chavudayyadanapura and Chaudayyadanapura

 Done Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

• Banashankri and Banashankari

{ DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

• Hirehadagalli and Hirehadgalli

 DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

There remains one variation in the current version. -- Michael Devore (talk) 01:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Nanesvara and Nannesvara

 DoneDineshkannambadi (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

There remains one variation in the current version. -- Michael Devore (talk) 01:48, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Basavana and Basavanna
  

DK Reply This is ok. Basavanna is a person, "Basavana Bagevadi" with single "n" is a place where he was laid to rest.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 23:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Two are in the template Western Chalukya Temples. One is in the template Karnataka. -- Michael Devore (talk) 16:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I will look into this today.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

DK Reply All spelling issues have been corrected.thanksDineshkannambadi (talk) 23:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

1. K. Kannikeswaran. "Templenet Encyclopedia, The Ultimate Source of Information on Indian Temples". Kalyani Chalukyan Temples. webmaster@Templenet.com. Retrieved 2007-11-10.