Talk:Pushpagiri Vihara

Requested move 12 December 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Good evidence provided by Utcursch. Jenks24 (talk) 07:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Pushpagiri Vihara → Puphagiri – It is unclear on what basis the article's name was changed by moving it to the current name by. The name being Pali or Sanskrit is less important than the original name that has been cited in multiple places. (plenty of references here). Is there any need for the "vihara" in the title? I do not believe so as it is a proper noun and the name itself would made a title. --Psubhashish (talk) 17:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Tiggerjay (talk) 22:05, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Apologies for not being clearer in my edit summary. The move was made based on the preference for Pushpagiri/Puṣpagiri/Puspagiri in reliable sources: cf. this vs. this. Xuanzang apparently called it Pusiepokili. Also worth considering are places like Shravasti and Kapilavastu which are spelt differently in Pali (Savatthi and Kapilavatthu). (Ashoka's grandfather was a Candagutta in Pali sources.) The vihara was added to the title to disambiguate this Pushpagiri from other Pushpagiris.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 19:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , appreciate your quick response. I am still not convinced about the title. When it is widely known as Puphagiri in Odisha and some recent historians name it "Puspagiri" or "Pushpagiri" based on their own interpretation. The latter is found to be appearing more online but still does not change the name of a place. "Chilika" for instance, is widely written as "Chilka". Web search will give a convincing result as well for "Chilka". Is that the only way to identify the common name? --Psubhashish (talk) 03:39, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Pupha (technically Puppha) means flower, the same as Pushpa. Another source for establishing usage is Google News and I don't see any preference for Puphagiri there either: Pushpagiri vs. Puphagiri. Anyhow, I've bolded Puphagiri in the article to give it greater prominence.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:19, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Relisting Comment - I have posted a request over at Noticeboard for India-related topics to solicit more input on this contested move request. Tiggerjay (talk) 22:05, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose. "Pushpagiri" and "Puspagiri" are far more common in scholarly sources, mass media as well as government records. Also, I don't see any evidence that Puphagiri was the "original name". utcursch &#124; talk 15:53, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * {| class="wikitable sortable"

! Query ! Google Books ! Google Scholar ! Google News ! site:nic.in ! site:gov.in
 * "Puphagiri" Buddhist (Odisha OR Orissa) -wikipedia
 * 59
 * 0
 * 0
 * 0
 * 0
 * "Puspagiri" Buddhist (Odisha OR Orissa) -wikipedia
 * 340
 * 35
 * 5
 * 8
 * 67
 * "Pushpagiri" Buddhist (Odisha OR Orissa) -wikipedia
 * 362
 * 28
 * 4
 * 64
 * 48
 * }
 * Adding to this: After digging through some sources, I've found that puphagiri is not at all used as a name for this site. The Brahmi inscriptions discovered at the site mention it as pushpa sabhar giriya. The word Puphagiri appears in an Andhra inscription, and some scholars suggest that it might be same as the Pushpagiri of Odisha; some others suggest that it's a reference to Pushpagiri in Andhra Pradesh. Also, this article mixes up Lalitgiri-Ratnagiri-Udayagiri with Langudi Hills site. Xuanzang mentioned Pu-se-p'o-k'i-li, which was interpreted as "Pushpagiri" by several of his translators. The archaeologists had been searching for this "Pushpagiri" for decades, and until the 1990s, believed it to be Lalitgiri-Ratnagiri-Udayagiri. However, this belief changed after the Langudi Hill excavations. Several descriptions of "Pushpagiri" in this article are actually from the three other sites. I'll clean up the article to make it more coherent and accurate. utcursch &#124; talk 20:41, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * 48
 * }
 * Adding to this: After digging through some sources, I've found that puphagiri is not at all used as a name for this site. The Brahmi inscriptions discovered at the site mention it as pushpa sabhar giriya. The word Puphagiri appears in an Andhra inscription, and some scholars suggest that it might be same as the Pushpagiri of Odisha; some others suggest that it's a reference to Pushpagiri in Andhra Pradesh. Also, this article mixes up Lalitgiri-Ratnagiri-Udayagiri with Langudi Hills site. Xuanzang mentioned Pu-se-p'o-k'i-li, which was interpreted as "Pushpagiri" by several of his translators. The archaeologists had been searching for this "Pushpagiri" for decades, and until the 1990s, believed it to be Lalitgiri-Ratnagiri-Udayagiri. However, this belief changed after the Langudi Hill excavations. Several descriptions of "Pushpagiri" in this article are actually from the three other sites. I'll clean up the article to make it more coherent and accurate. utcursch &#124; talk 20:41, 24 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Utcursch. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.