Talk:Pushyamitra Shunga

Untitled
sources?


 * Three sources are already cited in the text, and more are readily available on Internet. User:PHG


 * Sources are selectively cited. Unbalanced article. deeptrivia (talk) 04:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. This page seems to be incredibly one-sided. I don't see how one could deny the huge impact that both Buddhism and Hinduism have had on each other. I would like to see many citations supporting some of these claims, especially that so-called neo-Buddhists are trying to hide Hinduism's effect on Buddhism. Is this opinion or fact? --Loki125 07:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as I can tell PHG seems to be moderating this page and seems to be both considerably an experienced wikipedia editor in developing good wiki articles and one of our resident experts on greco-buddhist kingdoms/ interactions/ history neither of which make him a neo-buddhist. That said feel feel to improve it with attributable relevant sources as per wiki policy.--Tigeroo 06:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 19:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletions
As explained here this was deleted in the article by. But the reason was not explained.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pusyamitra_Sunga&diff=prev&oldid=126354485 Koenraad Elst posits that historical facts confirm that Pushyamitra allowed and patronized the construction of monasteries and Buddhist universities in his domains, as well as the still-existent stupa of Sanchi. Etienne Lamotte states: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.”
 * This specific edit is pertinent and supported by a sufficient reference (not Elst, but Etienne Lamotte's work, History of Indian Buddhism).  In the context it is cogent and responsible.Fconaway (talk) 08:19, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Lamotte is a reliable source, but per WP:CITE we should check him ourselves if we're using his reliability as the criterion and not that of the non-RS quoting him. I haven't been able to see this line quoted anywhere else. If someone has access to the original, they can perhaps check, but till then we have only Elst's word for it, and that's not good enough, I think. Relata refero (talk) 08:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Overly detailed
I think I was the one who added the tags. I find the sections on Pushyamitra's origins and his gotras to be overly detailed and given undue importance in the article. The section on his Buddhist persecution is, while less so, also overly detailed. There's also way too much "According to Foo" and "According to Bar" going on (where Foo and Bar are often authors of unreliable sources).--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 11:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Good point. On a closer look, much of the content seems to be original research (ancient texts such as Puranas are cited as references). I've trimmed the content. utcursch &#124; talk 16:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you! The article now reads much better. --Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 13:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

D. N. Jha on Pushyamitra
Could someone with access to either his book or the Caravan piece consider incorporating DN Jha's views on Pushyamitra Shunga into this article? You can read an excerpt here. The Caravan original is here.--49.205.84.127 (talk) 19:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)