Talk:Ayodhya (Ramayana)

Legendary city
, You claim that "one side" believes it is the same as the modern Ayodhya. This "one side" consists of just two individuals, BB Lal and Sankalia, neither of whom is a historian and hasn't managed to convince any historians. So, their view is only briefly stated for NPOV, but it cannot be given any more weight. The definitive historian of Ayodhya is Hans T. Bakker, who is categorical that there is no mention of a real city called Ayodhya in any texts until Skandagupta named it so. The removal of "legendary" from the first paragraph doesn't make sense because it is referred to in the second paragraph. You are making the content incoherent while pushing a POV.

And, you should be following WP:BRD when an edit is reverted. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Does it matter who is a historian or who is not? Are we at Wikipedia now analyzing their degrees and rate them? At Wikipedia we try to put neutral wording and the word legendary means "is of or relating to an old story or set of stories from ancient times, or the stories that people tell about a famous event or person" so balantly claiming Ramayana is fictional/mythical which can create another raging debate. Now this is sure POV. The wording "Ayodhya is a city mentioned in Ramayana" is better worded than "Ayodhya is a legendary(not real) city mentioned in Ramayana." As for other words I am putting "Ayodhya is closely/traditionally linked to modern city of Ayodhya" is no brainer. I am not saying IT IS archaelogically the same city (That will be POV) but again balantly claiming when That there is NO link between old and new city wether traditional, devotional or any other is plain ridiculous. Millions of pilgrims visit the city each year traditionally believing it to be, so few historians have an opinion. So do we run to Ayodhya and tell pilgrims that at the Great Wikipedia taking opinion of few "esteemed" better degree historians we have claimed the city is fake with no link to the text mentioned old city and stop them from claiming. Really??? JayB91 (talk) 02:33, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * On the first question, "Does it matter who is a historian or who is not?" the answer is yes. As per WP:HISTRS, historians get the first call to tell us what is historically true and what is not. The page itself describes quite extensively why the present day Ayodhya is not "linked" (whatever that means) to Valmiki's Ayodhya in the view of historians. Your revised wording of the LEAD is a blatant contradiction of that. If you edit with NPOV, you report what the reliable sources, not what you believe. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:05, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
 * By the way, I moved this page from Ayodhya (legendary city) to Ayodhya (Ramayana). So I know where you are coming from and how much concession to give it. Please don't attempt to lecture me. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:07, 15 September 2019 (UTC)