Talk:Chamunda

Removed WP:UNDUE to Kangra temple.
"Around 400 years ago the king and a Brahmin priest prayed to Devi for permission to move the temple to some easily accessible location. Devi appeared to the priest in a dream giving her consent. She directed him to dig in a certain spot and an ancient idol would be found and that idol should be installed in the temple and worshipped as Her form.

The king sent out men to bring the idol. Although they were able to locate it but were not able to lift it. Again Devi appeared to the priest in a dream. She explained that the men could not lift the holy relic because they considered it an ordinary stone. She instructed him to get up early in the morning, take a bath, wear fresh clothes and go to the place in a respectful manner. He did as he was told and found that he could easily lift what a large group of men could not. He told the people that it was the power of the Goddess that brought the idol to the temple."--Redtigerxyz (talk) 10:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Last line in Intro paragraph
"The goddess is often haunting cremation grounds or fig trees."

Is it supposed to mean - "The goddess is often said to haunt cremation grounds or fig trees." or something completely different? Cause, the way the sentence is right now, I'm pretty sure its NOT according to WP standards. Could somebody please look into it? Thanks, Abhishek 14 March, 2008.

GA nomination
You've been waiting a long time for a review. I've fixed a few typos. Some sentences don't make sense, though:
 * "The text further says that Chamunda does a dance of destruction, playing a musical instrument who shaft of Mount Meru, the spring the cosmic snake Shesha and gourd is the crescent moon. She plays the instrument during the deluge that drowns the world." - makes no sense to me
 * "Further, sage Mandavya is described as worshipping the Māṭrpaňcaka (the five mothers), Chamunda being one of them, who have been established by Brahma; for saving king Harishchandra from calamities." - unclear what part after semicolon refers to
 * "Some Jain scriptures warn of dire consequences of Chamunda by the Hindu rites and rituals." - unclear

The structure seems a little confusing to me. Would it make more sense to combine the Jain legends with the earlier Legend section? And maybe put that after the Origins section? The other concern I have is broadness. There is enough discussion of the legends. What other effects has Chamunda had on culture? Are there any other temples for instance? Gimmetrow 00:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I am a little busy in the next 2 weeks so would not edit daily, maybe just 3-4 times a week. So it would take me some time to answer your queries or implement your suggestions.

As Jainism is a different religion, combining it's legends with Hindu ones could be confusing. The logic in the structure is: Origins, In Hinduism and adoption of the Hindu goddess in Jainism. Moved Iconography above Origins, as com,mon to both religions. Open to suggestions about structure.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

There are many temples of the goddess. IMO, only the significant ones should be noted. As of now, the article lists 5 major temples. IMO, the main aspects are covered. If the reviewer finds more info about Chamunda, please let me know so i can add it to the article. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz (talk) 06:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand where you were going with the structure, so if you to put it back as it was, that's fine. I guess I keep thinking of the article on Kālī, which explains the relationship to trantra, different forms and traditions. If you say the main aspects are covered here, I'll have to take your word for it, but this article seems to me less satifying in comparision. I'll do another copyedit in a couple days if I can't think of anything more specific. Gimmetrow 20:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)