Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Iravan/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 15:43, 16 May 2010.

Iravan

 * Nominator(s): Redtigerxyz  Talk 18:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

This GA article is about a minor character from the Indian epic Mahabharata, who is also a Hindu Tamil village-god, patron of the transgender and is also known in Javanese Hinduism. The article recently had a copyedit and unofficial peer reviews by some wiki-users on the talk, keeping in mind the FA criteria. It also has relevant images thanks to generous flickr users. I am nominating this article for featured article because IMO, it satisfies all FA criteria after the copyedit and peer reviews. Redtigerxyz Talk 18:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments. A dab link to Garhwal; no dead external links. Ucucha 21:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ucucha 10:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Is it necessary to have a "See Also" link at the end of a section (namely, "Javanese Traditions") in the body of the article? Usually, articles that I've seen have see-also links at the beginning of sections, not the end. Couldn't that link be moved either to the beginning of the "Javanese Traditions" section, or to the article's central "See Also" section (which, interestingly, is right after the Javanese Traditions section)? Stonemason89 (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Tiger, what do you think? I think Hinduism in Indonesia/Java would work better in either of the places Mason suggests. I'd think it was better placed in the See also section, because this is not a summary article, and the tag interrupts the flow of the text slightly. I'm not sure I can remember exactly, but I might have moved it from the top to the bottom, for that reason. I left it in the section it applied to, though. Another, perhaps preferable, alternative would be to write it into the text of the Javanese traditions section. Alastair Haines (talk) 04:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. Put it as a hidden link. Removed "See also" section completely. Moved links to relevant places. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 04:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I'm happy. Stonemason? Alastair Haines (talk) 05:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good; I'm happy too. Thanks! Stonemason89 (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Images there are a couple of images from the 17th century tagged as being free as they are 70 years old, these should be retagged as 100 years to increase freeness Fasach Nua (talk) 22:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. The default PD-art template is used in accordance with When to use the PD-Art tag. Changed to . Would you please check the other images too? Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 10:26, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I think this is featured quality. A lot of hard work and copyediting has gone into it. One minor quibble though. There is some inconsistency with the spelling of Iravan in the article. It is mostly spelled in the article as Aravan. I understand that this is the spelling when discussing southern india but should the article be moved to Aravan?  Dr. Blofeld       White cat 20:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. Some clarifications about "should the article be moved to Aravan?"
 * There are 3 distinct traditions about Iravan (son of Arjuna and Ulupi):
 * 1. Sanskrit tradition (the oldest account: the Mahabharata - Mbh), where Iravan is hardly significant
 * 2. the Southern Indian tradition where Iravan/Aravan is significant in two cults, one of which is solely dedicated to him.
 * 3. the Javanese tradition where Iravan/Irawan even when officially a hero, is a minor character.
 * Moving Iravan to Aravan is OK if I remove the Java section, but the Mbh section is needed as parallels between the South Indian legends and Mbh account are drawn. Also a separate article about the Mbh Iravan will be always needed and there would be unnecessary repetition. The whole biography of the Mbh Iravan is already covered. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 04:34, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Seems Iravan is more appropriate then. I'm content with it as it is then. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 16:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support I believe that this article has reached the featured article status with excellent editing by Redtigerxyz and Alastair. In fact when Redtiger asked for my help to improve it, I could hardly find anything to improve as it had already reached that level. To the credit of Alastair and Redtiger they made a lot of improvements since then.--Anish (talk) 04:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for your support. Anish was one of those people, who was asked for the unofficial peer review on the talk, where he left some comments. Thanks for those comments too. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 12:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Placeholder (so I don't forget to review) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 14:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * File:Kurukshetra.jpg, File:Kali South Indian.jpg have author-dependent PD tags. If the author is not known, it's the wrong one to use (publication or anon. tags are needed).
 * They are 19th/18th century images. Even if the author (painter) is not unknown, by the 21st century (now), the author would be dead and 100 years gone. Can you please link other applicable licenses?
 * See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_tags . Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 21:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Goddes Kali01.jpg (a typical S. Indian Chola style bronze): an apt replacement for the S. Indian Kali image. If needed, This image can be used. Let me know if a replacement for the war img is needed, then I will search for it. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 14:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Changed both images. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

-- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 20:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Bambang Irawan.JPG-who made this (was it in fact the uploader?)
 * It is uploaded from the Indonesian wiki. I need to confirm with Indonesian wiki contributor. I can else remove it. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed the image. The Indonesian wiki uploader is inactive since Oct. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 04:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Not a subject I know anything about, but an interesting read. I couldn't see anything to object to  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  18:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reading the article and the support. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd like to see an independent copyedit here by someone unfamiliar with the text and familiar with MOS. "In any case"?  I got lost several times trying to decipher meaning of text.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 12:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. It has had an independent copyedit by User:Alastair Haines (who was unfamiliar with the text), but the end of the copyedit, he was quite familiar with the topic. I felt, he had almost read all the references on the topic available to him and has filled with Talk:Iravan with constructive criticism and queries, which worked like a extensive peer review too. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Still there: "In any case, the pre-battle sacrifice is the common element in the Tamil traditions."  Is "in any case" encyclopedic prose?  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 12:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments left on the Iravan page by SandyGeorgia as hidden comments:
 * Kuttantavar (Koothandavar)
 * Please read "Following and temples" and "Kuttantavar_cult_rituals", which present a summary of the cult. No article on the cult exists, except this.-- Redtigerxyz  Talk 18:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support Well written, all aspects covered, based on academic mainstream sources and covers all geographic locations of this unique phenomenon and cult. The article is easy to read although the subject matter is difficult. Good job Kanatonian (talk) 12:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. My common answer to "I got lost several times trying to decipher meaning of text." and "the subject matter is difficult" is that this article is about a Hindu deity with whom people may not be familiar and may face WP:JARGON problems. I have tried my best to explain jargon and Hindu concepts. However, the possibility of unexplained jargon can not be ruled out. If it still exists, please point it out. I have tried with the copyeditor to write the article in the simplest terms possible for non-Indian, non-Hindu reader. At the same time, I have keep this article at the standard so it can cater to "expert" Indians/Hindus. You can not write Electron/Scattered disc without using the suitable jargon. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Support: I've been slow to support this nomination because I was one of the copy-editors. However, part of my copy-editing was verifying content against the reliable sources cited. I have read most of the sources, and found the article to say no more than the sources did, and to have presented those sources with neutrality (no original evaluation). The organization of the article gives due weight to all available sources. There is no plagiarism.
 * My copy-edit did little but alter prose to reflect my own taste in formal, encyclopedic English. So I feel free to praise everything else about the article: logical organization, engaging and relevant factual matter, comprehensive treatment of core issues, apt illustration. In my estimation this article is indeed of a standard that can be held up as an example of the best Wikipedia has to offer. Editors who follow this example will serve readers and Wikipedia's reputation very well indeed
 * Thank you Tiger, for all your hard work in setting us this example. I have learned a lot from it, and would love for others to benefit from it also, by us agreeing to draw attention to it as a Featured Article. Alastair Haines (talk) 02:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Second-highest article contributor (unclear why you aren't a co-nom?). Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 13:00, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Though Alastair Haines primarily joined the article as a copyeditor, he proved to be much more than a copyeditor. He also verified the sources (most of them) and added some new material. Alastair Haines' comments talk about his observations. Anyway, for a NPOV, I suggest his vote be ignored. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Disclosure: Unfortunately, my copyeditor friend Alastair Haines is now banned for a year on wikipedia. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Note from nominator: I will be unable to edit wikipedia for next few days at least till 6th, but my absence may extend to the 9th. I request the closing admins that if there are any comments added in my absence and that need answers, I be given an opportunity to respond to them, before you close this nomination. Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 08:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

 Tentative support, but the prose needs a run-through. Here are examples. Tony  (talk)  13:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "—which is also a name commonly given to him in that cult—" makes it a longish sentence. I'm unsure what the "which" refers back to.
 * Should I put the - ... - text in brackets? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Remove "or" from the paranthetical bit?
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Isn't a self-sacrifice willing by default? In any case, "willing" is better on first occurrence.
 * Removed. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Is "boon" the right word? And "Krishna allowing Aravan to witness" is a noun plus -ing that could be rephrased.
 * 2) "hosted on a post"—sounds humorous.
 * Oops. Fixed. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Comma splice: "The head of Aravan is a common motif in Draupadi temples, often it is a portable wooden head".
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Is "also" necessary in the final para?
 * Also implies here that he is only known in India-- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "Java where, for example, he ..."
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "through", not "via" unless scientific or technical, I think.
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "red-face"—why the hyphen?
 * Removed. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Ref 17 quote needs comma after closing quotation marks (MoS).
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) "That manuscript evidence is somewhat late, given its material composition and the climate of India, but it is very extensive." I don't get the climate point, and the "but" doesn't seem to introduce a contrary statement.
 * Sentence removed. The para can do without it too. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:22, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I haven't got past the third section. Tony  (talk)  09:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. I will return to full-fledged copyediting only after Sunday. I have requested an editor to check. Waiting for his reply. I will try to fix minor issues. Please strike resolved concerns.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 16:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Tony typically gives samples, and didn't get beyond the third section; has the rest of the article been examined for similar? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Partly, as noted below. Many small things need attention. Finetooth (talk) 03:29, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I was concerned that you got through the same part Tony got through ... wondering if anyone has been through the bottom of the article. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 03:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Someone should look closely at "Aravan to Kuttantavar" and on to the end. I'll return tomorrow and see what I can do. Would it be better to post the whole business here, or would it be more helpful to continue on the article's talk page? Finetooth (talk) 04:52, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Please post on the talk and leave a link here, if it is OK. It has become too crowded here. Thanks again for reading the article. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Sources comments:- Otherwise, sources look okay. Brianboulton (talk) 18:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * References list: formatting is inconsistent.
 * 1) Several online sources lack last access dates
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 05:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Some entries, e.g. Ganguli, Thurston, lack publisher information
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Some books have ISBN, others not
 * Added ISBN of all books I found. The Sukthankar book does not have a printed ISBN on it. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is not necessary to specify that the source's language is English.
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The Ganguli publisher is the Internet Sacred Texts Archive, rather than the site's url. Other concerns all properly addressed. Brianboulton (talk) 08:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 12:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: Working my way down as far as the "Three boons" section, I've posted quite a few proofing comments to the article's talk page (Talk:Iravan). With one or two exceptions, I did not make changes directly to the article, which needs proofing on down to the bottom. Finetooth (talk) 23:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Posted replies on the talk. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 06:54, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm still finding it hard to decipher this article at all. Example from the lead:
 * In Koovagam, Tamil Nadu, this incident is re-enacted in an 18-day festival, first by a ceremonial marriage of Aravan to alis and male villagers (who have taken vows to Aravan), and then by their widowhood after ritual re-enactment of Aravan's sacrifice.
 * Who or what is Alis? Undefined term introduced in the lead.
 * lead 1st para " transgender communities called ali " Hijra is also linked. Quoted line is ahead in the 2nd para. Should I reformat it as alis? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * A ceremonial marriage to male villagers?
 * Yes. That's the intended meaning. The context and traditions are explained ahead. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * whose widowhood?
 * I do not see any other nouns related to "their" except alis and male villagers. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

This article assumes an understanding by the reader and is hard to get through. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 12:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The article does not assume any understanding, however it may be hard for people to digest the facts. A male god's wedding to male villagers sounds absurd, but is true. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:27, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't doubt that it's true, but the wording is still hard for the uninformed to understand and needs adjustments. (I'm following this FAC-- no need to ping me.) Sandy Georgia (Talk) 15:34, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't understand why "A ceremonial marriage to male villagers" is hard to understand for the uninformed. Yes, it is an alien subject for most readers, but you can't over-simplify "encyclopedic" articles. Please be more explicit. Can you tell me Sandy how to make the uninformed understand this? What adjustments are needed? Please give me an example, say reword the sentence you quoted. That would help me understand. Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 17:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Would it help to explain on first reference to "ali" in the first paragraph that the plural of "ali" is "alis"? Otherwise "alis" to a foreigner (like me) looks like a noun ending in "s" rather than a plural. Like this perhaps: "He is also a patron god of well-known transgender communities called ali (plural alis) (also aravani in South India, and hijra throughout South Asia). Finetooth (talk) 23:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, saying "alis" is the plural is the wrong. The plural of ali in Tamil (original language) is not alis. It is only in English that alis is considered a plural (used in Niklas (2003) and  Hiltebeitel (1995)). Also, there are other similar plurals like lakons, thalis, puranas. Are we opening a pandora's box with adding the plural thing for all? I will alis to "Alis" and likewise as it is references (Alis was chnaged to alis by the copyeditor). That may help. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 08:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Alis issue is not unique to this article. It must exist in other articles where non-English words are used. Any MOS commenting on this????? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 09:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I retract my suggestion for plurals; it was not such a good idea. Finetooth (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I've completed proofing the article all the way to the end. Meanwhile Redtiger used my first set of suggestions on the article's talk page to revise. I went back through the early sections today to read them with Redtiger's alterations in place, and they were better. I should add that I had not read this article before yesterday and that I knew nothing of Iravan. I did have trouble wrapping my head around all the unfamiliar terms and the complicated interactions of the characters, and I would not like to take a pop quiz on the variants of the Iravan tale. Still, especially on the second read-through, I would say that I understand the essentials. Finetooth (talk) 23:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support: Aside from two minor quibbles remaining on the article's talk page and the [sic] that's still dangling at the end of the sentence mentioned by Steve below, the MoS glitches have been fixed to my satisfaction. Finetooth (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * All of my concerns have been addressed. Finetooth (talk) 02:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. I read parts of this a few days ago, noting a few prose issues, but refrained from commenting after seeing Tony and Sandy's most recent posts, and that Finetooth was performing a followup copyedit. Parts of the article—most even—were very well written, but now I think I can say all of it is pretty good. Some of it could be tighter, but overall a fine job that I'd be happy seeing featured. This is a subject area I'm completely unfamiliar with, but I wasn't left needing/wanting to know more; the narrative flow is especially strong and held my attention. Image licenses and tags all seem fine (see below for a minor query), and from what I can see (again, unfamiliar), the sources are high-quality. On the MOS side, little jumps out as needing correction. Minor comments: 1) I'd discard italics where they've been used for emphasis alone outside quotes; I can't see any instance that needs them. 2) I realise it can only ever be an approximation, but no dates are given in the lead, definitely leaving the question begged for those unfamiliar with the topic. 3) In "Historical development", I can't see any need for the [sic] in "a representative of countless innocent  youth[s] who[m]  [sic] their  mothers" when you've already corrected it via the square brackets. Probably no need to correct "who" to "whom" either; it may only hold readers up as they pause to consider why. 4) Do File:Kurukshetra.jpg and File:Kali South Indian.jpg have the correct tag (author +100 years)? Of course, their respective authors will be long dead, but I assume there's a PD tag available that isn't as dissonant. Overall though, nice work. Best,  Steve  T • C 22:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. Replies: 1) Removed italics for emphasis 2) Giving one date would to be UNDUE to one view, the dates' issue is much more complex see "Historical development" section 3) Done. If "who" is right, then [m] can be removed. IMO, whom is the best here. 4) the two images you are talking about, have been replaced by new ones on 28 April 2010 (the current version). -- Redtigerxyz Talk 08:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * On 3) I don't think who is right, but the correction to whom is, IMO, more distracting than leaving it as per the original. On 4) That's OK then. :-) I just looked at David's comments above and didn't note that they didn't look like those I'd already seen in the article. Cheers, Steve  T • C 11:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose Comments
 * Shouldn't epic be linked in the first sentence? It'd also help if "boon" was linked, since I don't know what it meant.
 * Why should epic, boon be linked? These links are not central ("particularly relevant") to the article and also these words are part of standard English (not jargon). IMO, WP:OVERLINK would have been violated. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe the fact that it is a specific type of literature is relevant, and boon has various definitions. Even if you didn't link boon in the lede, it'd help if it was later on, as I'm not sure what it refers to. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no suitable article to link to boon. There is only meaning of boon as a noun, "something that is asked; a favor sought."/"something to be thankful for; blessing; benefit." Linked epic to Hindu epic. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Both these cults are of South Indian origin, from a region of the country where he is worshipped as a village deity and is known as Aravan (Tamil: அரவான், Aravāṇ)."
 * I have two problems with this sentence. First, it should be "both of these cults", but more importantly, is Iravan known as Aravan, or is the deity version of him known as Aravan? (or, is there no difference?) I was just a little confused by the wording.
 * Iravan is known as Aravan in Tamil. There are no two versions of Iravan: one human and one divine. There is only one Iravan/Aravan. "Both these" is acceptable in Indian English, the language in which the article is written. I am opposed to adding of the "of". Also I found the phrase in The Journal of General Physiology, -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I guess I understand it now. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The second paragraph of "Etymology and other names" is unsourced.
 * The later paragraphs have the details and references. I have already left a hidden comment there. If needed, I can duplicate the references. This issue was discussed before. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yea, I think you should duplicate the references, just so the end of every paragraph can have a reference (which I think is important). Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Duplicated it, though IMO unnecessary as an elaborate explanation is found further. -- Redtigerxyz  Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there a way you can cut down on the quote in the first paragraph of "Etymology and other names" ? - "oblatory substance consumed by the participants from which comes all fecundity of the sacrifice" - I, for one, didn't know what "fecundity" meant.
 * Since it is the scholar's definition, it is kept unaltered in quotes. I can link it, but that's a case of OVERLINK IMO.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand now, how that's a person's definition, but I think that could still be explained better. Just reading the quote gives me no context to how it relates to the article, since I don't know what it means. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I really can't understand what you can't understand. It's grammatically correct English. The context is there: Iravan or Iravant -> "one who possessed Iḍā" -> Ida defn -> scholar's conclusion based on her defn.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Thus, in the Mahabharata, Iravant means sacrificial victim" - I don't think that writing is very encyclopediac (starting with "thus"). It implies that its meaning was derived by the author (WP:OR). Can you reword that sentence?
 * Its meaning is derived by Biardeau. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm saying the word "thus" is poor writing. It's as if it talks down to the reader. I like how you give it the clarification that Biardeau made the connection, but there's got to be a better way to say it. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "The South Indian, Tamil name, Aravan, is popularly believed to be derived from the word aravu (snake)." - since when should a featured article include what's popularly believed? An encyclopedia is based on facts. Please reword that. It also might fit well in the subsequent section (iconography)
 * The reference clearly says it is popularly believed. There are views and counter-views in Hinduism, which one is the most popular needs to be noted. Initially, we had one section on Iconography and etymology, which was split into two as there are separate ideas. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as the reference says that it's popularly believed, I'm fine. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Even the central Koovagam icon features a serpent on Aravan's crown." - this is the first time you mention "Koovagam", so I have no idea what it means, especially without a Wikilink.
 * The link is in the lead. Repeating it so soon would be a violation of OVERLINK. The assumption is that the reader reads in sequence from the lead. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't notice the link when I first read it, but no, I don't think repeating the link would be a violation of overlink. That's also the first time you said "central Koovagam", as opposed to just "Koovagam" as you used in the lede. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Replaced central with chief. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Aravan-head icons are of two types, unpainted ones or painted" - couldn't this be written as "Aravan-head icons can either be painted or unpainted"?
 * "can" suggests a possibility. "are" suggests existence.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ...so couldn't you just say "Aravan-head icons are either painted or unpainted", as opposed to lengthening the sentence with "are of two types"? It's obvious if you say they are either painted or unpainted, then there are only two types. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I only got as far as Iconography, but I feel it is too difficult to understand to be an FA. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:57, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As said before, the article subject matter is perceived to be difficult may be bcoz it is about a Hindu deity. One must read it like scientific articles like FAs Scattered disc and Electron where one will encounter new terms and new ideas, which will be apparently difficult to understand. Over-simplifying the article to the level of Simple English wiki, would deplete its encyclopedic quality, though this article attempts to explain all jargon and Hindu concepts. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I've read FA's on difficult topics, and they a better job at carefully describing all jargon and Hindu concepts. I'm just not impressed with the writing. Here are some random examples where I feel the writing is lacking.


 * "The background to the Mahabharata suggests a time inferred to be" (rather wordy)
 * Any suggestions? I can't think of one that is accurate in terms of meaning and less wordy. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this is a little less cumbersome while not losing any of the intended meaning. Steve  T • C 09:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Thanks. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 12:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "It is generally agreed, however, that " - who generally agreed?
 * "By scholars" is implicit. Ref says. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "which may include an allusion in Panini's fourth-century grammar" - "fourth-century grammar what?"
 * Clarified. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "both the birth and death of Iravan himself" - himself is redundant
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "but Iravan's army of Nagas slays their opponents to but one man." - "to but one man" sounds like it'd be in a story, not in an encyclopedia article
 * It is a narrative after all. Suggestions? -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I see Hurricanehink's point; worded more simply it provides a more encyclopedic tone. Steve  T • C 09:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 12:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Iravan, the "chastiser of foes"—versed in maya (illusion)—" - just curious, why isn't maya piped?
 * Actually it was initially, but any way the meaning of the jargon maya, was needed. So it was a repetition. Anyway, Done.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "So, Duryodhana approaches and convinces Aravan to be the sacrificial victim for the kalappali." - it is improprer to start a sentence with "so"
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Krishna first discusses things with" - "things" is very unencyclopediac
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "But no woman wanted to marry Aravan" - sentences shouldn't start with "But"
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "The self-sacrifice prior to the war, is incompatible with dying a heroic death during the war; and both are incompatible with living to see the full duration of the war." - any reason for the comma in the first part of the sentence? Also, after the semicolon, you shouldn't follow with "and". You could, however, get rid of the first comma, and change the semicolon to a regular comma.
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "After the war, while the Pandavas are boasting about vanquishing the Kauravas, Krishna asks Aravan—the sole witness of the entire war—who was truly responsible for winning this war?" - little quibble, but shouldn't the last part be in quotations?
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "With this in mind, the head of Aravan is consigned to the river, is transformed into a child called Kuttan ("born from water") and kills the demon." - poor sentence structure, regarding the lack of parallelism between "is consigned", "is transformed", and "kills". I think it needs to be reworded, perhaps something like: "With this in mind, the head of Aravan is consigned to the river and is transformed into a child called Kuttan ("born from water"), who kills the demon."
 * Done. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * In "Following and temples" section, you have a source for some of the temples, but not all. Notably missing is a reference for "Coimbatore district".
 * The reference for all is at "The 32 temples are:[66]". The others are specific notes related to the temple or district. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Often it is a portable wooden head, sometimes this even has its own shrine in the temple complex." - that is two complete thoughts, so either you need a semicolon, or reword it by removing "this" and altering the wording.
 * Done.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "5 miles (8.0 km) north-west of Chidambaram" - any reason for the exact 8.0 km, considering it just says "5 miles"?
 * Have used convert. I am not writing this for only Americans. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Hurricanehink was referring to the rounding error; I have adjusted the template to return 8 km instead of 8.0 km. Finetooth (talk) 01:53, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, misunderstood comments. Thanks, Finetooth. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)


 * "Most Alis have left. and men wedded to Aravan also break their thalis and bangles and perform all the rites of widowhood (the vellikkal rites) before the image of Aravan." - please fix
 * Fixed. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 03:36, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

That's it for now. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:58, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's still too technical for me to give my full support, but given the support above, I'm satisfied enough to strike my oppose. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 17:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the no oppose. Suggestions for further improvement are still welcome. No article is perfect. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 18:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Hurricanehink; I still find many portions of the article hard to understand, but apparently that's only me. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 15:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.