Talk:Brahma Temple, Khedbrahma

Any suggestions?
, I read your notes in description of File:8th-century Brahma temple, Khedbrahma Group of Temples, Gujarat.jpg. The temple is dated to 11th-century as per sources in the article. The article don't have best sources but usable ones. Please improve if you have better sources and information. This article was created as spin-off from Khedbrahma. Feel free to give any suggestions. Regards,- Nizil (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Khedbrahma monuments were built over a period of time. Chronology estimates vary by sources. Dhaky and few others suggest it may in part or mostly be an 11th century Karnadeva reign temple. Khedbrahma was a much much older town/city, per scholarly sources. Some temples were rebuilt, and the Brahma temple is likely one of those. The floor plan of Brahma temple, some artwork, iconography, inscriptions found here are older. I cannot help right now, as I am busy reviewing and uploading photos of about 600+ monuments, and floor plans of another 200+ monuments from South Asia and SE Asia (I have them, but I am way behind in my uploads as the OTRS team will attest; I am slow). I am delighted that you just created this article. Some suggestions for this article:
 * please reconsider – rather strongly reconsider – using outdated non-HISTRS Gazetteer and such sources in this or other articles. I strongly advise against Gazetteers and similar sources. They were the blogs of that era, based on random hearsay spiced up orientalist summaries. They are unhelpful ahistorical (mis)information served under the rubric "mythology" (= cook up anything, it does not matter if it is verifiable in Prakrit or Sanskrit or any language manuscript).
 * If we can't find a post-1960 scholarly source, or a textual source to back the alleged mythology, we should skip that mythology, or if you wish, put such non-HISTRS as an external link or in bibliography.
 * Please do review and summarize Henry Cousens' long article on this Khedbrahma temple. It was published in 1909 as a chapter in the ASI 1906-07 Annual Report, pp. 171–178 (he has an introduction on Brahma from pp. 171–174, you will the plan there too). Henry Cousens is also dated, but he remains a good source given his depth and his scholarly mindset. Of course, we should attribute and mention the year of his publication.
 * In a few weeks, or months, I will revisit this article. If need be, I will try to build on your initiative, an initiative that is very welcome. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2021 (UTC)