Talk:Hinduism/Archive 13
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Votes in favor of HeBhagawan's version:
- I don't really know anything about it, but he requested I vote and I think his wording looks good. - Mike | Talk 23:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- I should note upfront that I was also asked to vote. This version seems more encyclopedic to me because it doesn't border on original research, while presenting multiple perspectives more clearly. Caste is associated with Hinduism, here's why/how, and here's the controversy about the matter. Sounds good.PelleSmith 15:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Swadhyayee's version is good, but it doesn't talk about caste-system in present days. While I agree that caste system is dwindling now, it still exists. utcursch | talk 04:41, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- The only problem with this version is that it is a bit lengthy. Practically all the sections in the article must be trimmed down a bit if it will have a chance of surviving FAC. GizzaChat © 05:00, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- I personally agree with some of the strong feelings about caste being presented here, especially Baka's version. But I think HeBhagavan's is by far the most NPOV and encyclopedic, which is what Wikipedia is about. Any trimming and shortening would be helpful, though. ॐ Priyanath 05:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- ______
- ______
- ______
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | → | Archive 20 |
The vote:
Votes in favor of Swadhyayee's version:
- Arjun, I have no strong opinion one way or another I feel though that Swadhyayees gives a more round approach and better suits the article. Good job to both however.
- Users may be interested in a quote section I will have on User:Bakasuprman/Hinduism#Quotes indicating parts of scriptures that reject the caste system. The caste system is a socio-economic phenomenon not a religious phenomenon. If hebhagwan's or priyanath get their way, at least compare to a more secular system like serfdom or Chinese/Japanese economic systems, which provide better comparisons.Bakaman Bakatalk 23:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've read each of them and this just seems the more balanced to me. I agree with Bakasuprman, religion did not make the caste system hereditary and was more what humans used to enforce power and to stay in power. Note that a king's son would generally be a king in any society (Kshatriya) or the son of a Vaishya would likely be involved in mercantile businesses as well, as they would learn from their father, carry on business etc. This happened in EVERY society, although it may be more strict in medieval Hindu society. This entire concept is now disappearing in India and should be presented as such. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 04:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- 'or whether you are speaking on behalf of Swadhyayee'. I strongly object to HeBhagawan making this kind of accusations to a suggestion by another editor, and for just this reason, I vote for Swadhyayee. A person who has this kind of unwarranted mentality is not a fit person to write on Hinduism. These edit wars have started only after HeBhagawan 'INTRUDED' in the page. We had disagreements earlier also but they did not end up in this way. Aupmanyav 01:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Aupmanyavji, please see WP:CIV and WP:NPA. Many editors have had disagreements with HeBhagawan but have respectfully discussed their problems with each other and he has cooperated well (Ask Raj2004 and Priyanath). There is no reason to get hostile. See User_talk:Priyanath/archive1#God_as_Divine_Accountant for an example of how HeBhagawan has been civil. GizzaChat © 06:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- _______
- _______
I have moved the discussion between Swadhyayee and Gizza here. Apologies for confusion.
Votes in favor of Gauranga's version:
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
Any other versions:
Votes in favor of Priyanath's version:
- Namaḥṣivaya, ॐ Śaiva Sujīţ ॐ 04:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, this is sort of funny, but I'm changing my vote to support Priya's version. I still like my own version, but his has the great merit of being short while still addressing 1) what is caste, and 2) what is the current state of the caste system. HeBhagawan 23:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
Votes in favor of Bakaman's version:
- I would go with either mine or Swadhyayee's.Bakaman Bakatalk 17:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think, that by putting it to vote we have blown the issue out of proportion only to satisfy HeBhagawan. I object voting on petty matters yet if I have to vote, I would vote for Bakasuprman as it is full of sense and ref. also brief and non-controversial. I had just removed two paras which I felt to be irrelevant and lowering the qualtiy, I have not given any version and would not like it to be called my version and voted for the same. swadhyayee 18:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- _______
- _______
- _______
- _______
If people want to, we can have a runoff vote between the top two. Or not. Whatever you want.HeBhagawan
- That seems to be the best thing to do. When are we going to have the vote? Aupmanyav 01:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Instead of competing for an acceptable phrasing, let us please instead create a list of ideas that we can all agree on should be conveyed. I think this will make life much more easier, and less side-choosing, hard feelings, etc. ॐ नमःशिवाय Śaiva Sujīt सुजीत ॐ 08:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)