Hinduism Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

	India Template‑class
This template is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

The line keeps it all in line and always in line.. Wikidās 21:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Madhava 1947, Hello. You have omited some critical information on the template. The essential seems to be lacking and that is english translation, its is not only for hindus, I mean the Wikipedia. We will have to revert some changes to retain NPOV of the template.Wikidās ॐ writes this on 13:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why do we need english translations?? The articles explains the concept. Literal translations really do not convey the meaning of the philosophies.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article Vallabhacharya does not explain what is "Rudra-sampradaya". So linking Rudra-sampradaya to Vallabhacharya leads to confusion.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 13:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the article just states he is it's founder, noying else.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 12:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why do we have both Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs and Template:VaisnavaSampradayas when only one is needed? --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good question. The second one is used only on my user page.. Is it wrong? Wikidās ॐ 23:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are multiple things wring with Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs. The first is the most obvious - you can tell that it was created from Template:VaisnavaSampradayas because the v•d•e (view/discuss/edit) links of Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs all point to the Template:VaisnavaSampradayas links instead! Also, the template is Chaitanya Mahaprabhu-centric, with the caption stating "Chaitanya Mahaprabhu united four sampradayas into one", and with the bottom line pointing to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. The template also only points to the leaders of each sampradaya, while Template:VaisnavaSampradayas correctly points to both the sampradayas and their leaders, as well as linking to their associated philosophies. Template:VaisnavaSampradayas is more complete, accurate, NPOV, and has no (known) link problems. For these reasons I think Template:VaisnavaSampradayas should be used and Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs deleted. If you choose to use Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs on your userpage, I recommending using ((subst:Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs)) before its deletion so that it may remain on your userpage in its current form. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The correct English spelling is Vaishnava. I propose a move from Template:VaisnavaSampradayas to Template:VaishnavaSampradayas to reflect the English spelling. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think if you move, you can create a redirect so that all pages will work. I accept that its a common spelling, but this spelling is not a common rule to templates, unless you know something I do not. Its a transliteration of the (Vaiṣṇava-sampradāya)Wikidās ॐ 23:18, 9 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have nominated Template:VaishnavaSampradayasrs for deletion as suggested, as this template is the better one and more widely used. Please comment and support/oppose the nomination there. Thanks --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]