Talk:Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham/Archive 1

Changes
I've made a number of changes to this page.


 * Removed quotes from 'influential institutions'. I can't see that there is any doubt about its influence. That's one of the reasons for the controversies around it.


 * Removed the following text, because the first is arguable (see history later), and the second irrelevant here;
 * The Mutt has a long established history of saints and was reverred all over India.Sri Chandrashekarendra Saraswathi Swamigal was a saint who lived for 100 ears and was popular all over India for his simple life and humility. He refused to meet Indira Gandhi at the time of Emergency.

Imc 19:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Removed and simplified much of the history paragraph, to state only the formal claim to being founded by Sankara, and to the dispute as to Sankara's place of death The other claims, (e.g. that the courts support the matha's official history) need references and to be clearly written if they are to be included in the article. The existing references only support the statements now on the page.

Imc:many o

The source http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/avhp/alt_hindu_msg.html does not qualify as a primary or secondary reliable sources according to wiki guidelines : "Personal websites as primary sources" "Personal websites and blogs may never be used as secondary sources". This link is to a email letter written to some organisation. This may be therefore deleted.

Appaiah 12:53, 26 December 2005 (UTC


 * Sorry Appaiah, I disagree, both with your above statement, and the same reason that was given for your edit of 19th Feb.


 * First, the original posting was to a mailing list. A mailing list is not a 'blog', by any stretch of the imagination, nor is it a personal website. I agree only that it was an email, and that it was to a mailing list. Also the content was not 'from a blog' (as stated previously), it was from a person to the mailing list. Such posts are regularly quoted in scholarly circles, providing the content itself meets similar criteria to those that Wikipedia sets. An article does not have to be published in article format to be reputable and quoted.
 * Second, this reference is not the original mailing list anyway. It is a web page at http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/ which is a major and reputed website, and publishes this posting because of its content.
 * Third, S. Vidyasankar is himself a reputable source. He has other reputable published work on related topics, for instance that on Jyotirmath. This detailed and researched email has itself been reproduced, as here and on other websites, for its content and value. See also;
 * Finally, I've looked through Verifiability and the only item that I can see that may support your case is that which says that 'blogs' are not verifiable sources. I trust that this is not the reason you insist on calling it a blog, when it is not.


 * On the reversion of the other (anonymous) edits, it is not the purpose of Wikipedia to give details of the organisation's contacts in the USA. Imc 21:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry i disagree.Advaita vedanta is the personal website of so called Vidyasankar Sundersan who keep on saying Kanchi Mutt is not an established mutt with the so called inscriptions. Sringeri Mutt holds date of adisankara in the 1st century till 19th century AD.But now they show 788-820 AD.Did he said anything about that? What about the geneologies of other main mutts which agree in common of 6th century BC.Did he say anything about that? How fortunate. No importance should be given to the website which shows this much IGNORANCE.The ONLY thing which is altogther correct is about his Jyoti Mutt.14.99.22.138 (talk) 06:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Murder trial
I was surprised to find no reference to the ongoing murder trial in the article. I have added a summary paragraph with citations.

I think we should provide more details of this episode and its effect on the matha. mukerjee (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.kamakoti.org/peeth/origin.html and other pages in that domain. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Template default image
The infobox template in this article is adding a default image. This image is simply wrong and the Kanchi monastery looks very different (I will upload some images with embedded EXIF data when I return to my office). Is there a way to remove this default image misinformation? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 03:23, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ms Sarah Welch, you can edit the default image by clicking on "wikidata item" in the menu on the left, which should take you to Q129932. Frietjes (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)