Talk:Deogarh, Uttar Pradesh

Major copy edit

Following a request at the Guild of Copy Editors by Nvvchar, I have started a major edit of this article. I have the following comments:

• The lead says that it is a village, and then later, there is a section referring to it as a town. Which is it, village or town? They mean different things.
  • Corrected to village in other section.
• The geography section is a bit short. I suggest "Geography and climate" so that it can be expanded. Also, it would be good if the population part can be expanded. Surely there's more from the census. In addition, population doesn't really belong here. So, if the population portion can be expanded, it can have its own heading.
  • Separate heading for Demographics. I have been able to find Cenusus records for the village for 2001, which I have now added. However, no further information on agriculture statistics or any other information related to village proper are avaialble in any web refrence or published book. It is a small village and the revenue records are not digitzed and published yet.

OK

I have completed up to and including the History section, but I have to stop now. I will continue another time. I am noting this here in case other members of WP:GOCE want to pick up where I left off, before I can. -- S Masters (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. Deogarh is a farming village. I have corrected it now. I am trying to get more information of the village from census records. I will add a demographic section after I am able to find the details.Thanks.--Nvvchar (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

OK. Some information about rainfall, temperature, etc. would be helpful in this section. In addition, as it is a farming village, more information on what farming activity takes place (crops, animals, etc.) will also be good. -- S Masters (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• Vishnudharmottara Purana, an ancient treatise, describes several temples out of which Sarvatobhadra temple has been compared by archaeologists and Indologists with the ‘Dashavatara’ Temple (Vishnu temple) or the ‘Gupta Mandir’ of Deogarh. - This sentence is very confusing. What is the Sarvatobhadra temple? It is the first time it is mentioned in the ariticle with no explanation of what it is, and further, there are no other articles in Wikipedia for Sarvatobhadra. I need to know what it is before improving this sentence.
  • Yes. I have used this reference [1]. Sarvatobhadra temple is mentioned in the Visnudharmottarapurna. Alexander Lubotsky , Indologist in Leiden has compared it with Deograh in his article. The details of Visnu temple at Deogarh have been inferred by comparison with the Sarvatobhadra temple. However there is no article on Sarvatobhadra temple in wikipedia. Vishnudharmottara Purana is, however, an article in wiki.

I have rewritten this sentence so that it is clearer.

• The comparative study revealed that the ideal temple design described in the treatise as 'Sarvatobhadra temple' was the same as the Vishnu temple of Deogarh. This conclusion was based on plan, size, iconography and several other norms described for building Hindu temples. - Who did this study? Is it from the Vishnudharmottara Purana or from archaeologists and Indologists?
  • Alexander Lubotsky , Indologist of Leiden has compared it with Deogarh, in his article original of which appeared in: "Ritual, State and History in South Asia. Essays in Honour of J.C. Heesterman, edd.

A.W. van den Hoek, D.H.A. Kolff, M.S. Oort. Leiden, etc. (1992), 199-221."

I have changed it to: A comparative study....

• the entrance to Vasudeva, the Gajendramoksha side to Samkarshana, the destructive aspect of Vishnu, the Nara -Narayana side to Pradyumna, the preserving aspect of Vishnu, and the Anantashayana side to Aniruddha, the creative aspect of Vishnu - I can't seem to get the four facets of Vishnu from this. Separate each of the facets with semi-colons as it is not clear.
• Please remember that internal links (wikify) should only happen at the first instance only. I had to correct a number of these.
  • As suggested corrected as follows: 'the entrance is represents to Vasudeva; the Gajendramoksha side is referred as Samkarshana, the destructive aspect of Vishnu; the Nara-Narayana side is known as Pradyumna, the preserving aspect of Vishnu; and the Anantashayana side is known as Aniruddha.

- I have now completed up to and including "Dashavatara temple". I have to stop and will continue at a later time. -- S Masters (talk) 10:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• The fort, when originally built, was known as 'Karnali'. Subsequently, it was named as ‘Kirtigiridurga’, after it was built in 1057 (samvat 1154) during the reign of Chandela King Kirtivarman. But it is also said that fort was built by the Pratihara rulers of Kannauj in the 9th century, changed hands from the builders to the Chandelas and the Bundelas before it came under the control of the Scindias of Gwalior. - This is completely confusing. How can it be built twice? I have tried to copy edit this as much as possible (the current version is not what you see here), hopefully making it clearer without taking anything away from the original meaning, but this double building bit needs to be clarified.
  • Corrected version is fine.

• While descending via the Rajghat, the cliff wall is to the right. It is an artificial plain cave. - What is an artificial cave? The cliff wall?
  • Removed the word artificial
• Why does "Fort temples" need its own heading? Aren't the temples that are in the fort collectively known as "fort temples"?
  • Agreed. I have merged it with Jain temples

• The Jain temples have a large number of panels depicting scenes from Jain mythology, Tirthankara images, votive pillars and votive tablets, Jain images visible from all sides and pillars carved with a thousand Jain figures. - This long sentence is badly composed. It needs to be broken into two sentences. I need to confirm - the panels contain pillars? Is that correct?
  • Pillar is an independent structure as seen in the mage in the gallery. As suggested, I have broken the sentence as under.

"The Jain temples have a large number of panels depicting scenes from Jain mythology, Tirthankara images and votive tablets. The pillars are carved with a thousand Jain figures."

• Since the building of the fort under the name Kirtigiridurga is dated to 1097, its impact on the Jain community was considerable. - How is this so when the Jain temples predate this?
  • Sentence deleted for clarity, as suggested.

• The number of images and inscriptions for each temple (most of them seen on images) have been recorded. - Seen on what images? Is the part in parenthesis necessary?
  • Parentheis is removed.

• There is a mention of a museum much earlier in the article. As there is very little information on it, I suggest it be removed completely from its own section below.
  • Deleted

- My full copy edit is now complete, except for the points I have raised above. I will come back to fix these if they are addressed. If you have any comments about my copy edit, please put them on my talk page. A note that this copy edit has been completed will also be posted at WP:GOCE. Thank you. -- S Masters (talk) 16:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• • Thanks for the edits, which has been done with great patience. I appreciate yout timely help. I have replied under each of the above observations. I am unable to find any additional material on the Deograh village on the web or any published books. --Nvvchar (talk) 03:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I've also done most of the suggestions listed by Jezhotwells, but you still need to go through them to make sure there are no outstanding issues. I couldn't do some of them as they are not copy edit issues, but to do with the actual content. For example: The temple is set on a high plinth and has a basement porch. Jezhotwells is correct, the temple can't be set on a high plinth. Is it supposed to say: The temple has a high plinth and is set with a basement porch.? -- S Masters (talk) 05:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I have made a few more fixes (and replied above, below your comments). Just one more thing, try not to use curly styled, grave or acute accents as quotation marks. I had to remove them all. See WP:MOS#Quotation marks. OK, I think my job is done here. Good luck and let me know if you need more help. :-) -- S Masters (talk) 06:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. As a beginer to GAN, I have learnt a lot in this process. I will now attend to other issues raised in the review by User:Jezhotwells. Hope to compltete my inputs today itself.--Nvvchar (talk) 07:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Deogarh, Uttar Pradesh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100103181831/http://up-tourism.com/destination/deogarh/intro.htm to http://www.up-tourism.com/destination/deogarh/intro.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100110043802/http://ccrtindia.gov.in/guptasculp.html to http://ccrtindia.gov.in/guptasculp.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:11, 9 September 2017 (UTC)