Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jainism/archive3


 * 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 list was not promoted by 10:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC).

Jainism

 * Nominator(s): Rahul Jain (talk) 03:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because it has addressed all the concerns raised in its previous nomination and meets the Featured Article Criteria. Rahul Jain (talk) 03:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Support but what happened to SC judgement that Jainism is not part of the Hindu religion? That carries Hindu POVs worth writing And have you mentioned those we often see as "Hindu-Jains" who aren't pure Jains?
 * Comment The following source: used as a reference in about 20 different places in the article is unreliable. Kalpaz Publications is same as Gyan Publishing House a listed Wikipedia Mirror and a known problematic publisher. For more details see RSN about Gyan, RSN which includes Kalpaz, Userpage on Gyan and another Userpage.  Correct Knowledge  «৳alk»  23:07, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have replaced that source with other alternatives. Rahul Jain (talk) 06:02, 3 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose – Isn't it necessary for this candidate to pass WP:GAN before proceeding with FAC. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  16:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * It isn't mandatory for an article to be a Wikipedia:Good Article before being eligible for becoming a Featured Article, as far as I know. Rahul Jain (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Not only is it not mandatory, it's not even suggested anywhere as far as I know of. Rreagan007 (talk) 22:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment – No, it's not mandatory for a candidate to pass GAR before coming here. I have been meaning to review this for some time now, but couldn't find the time for it. On a cursory glance, the connection between Jainism and Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) appears to be undue, if not fringe. Other than cults of goddess and fertility worship, religious practices of IVC have not been established with certainty. None of the popular textbooks of Indian history (Singh,Stein,Tripathi) or other encyclopedic entries on Jainism push back the dates to IVC or make any reference to Jainism within the civilization. Yet the article devotes half of the history section to Indus Valley Civilization, while it glosses over the origins of Jainism within the skeptical, ascetic tradition that arose out of increasing urbanization of India in 7th and 6th centuries BCE. This to me is a serious NPOV issue. The article is otherwise well written, I might come back with a detailed review.  Correct Knowledge  «৳alk»  18:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have removed some lines regarding the connection between Jainism and IVC to avoid undue weight. However, the fact regarding meditative postures (standing/sitting) bears close resemblance to Jain practices is substantiated with reliable resources. Just two lines regarding it and a quote from the Ram Prasad Chandra should present the point neutrally I suppose. Rahul Jain (talk) 16:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose &mdash; The lead should summarize the article. It does not. It is too short and does not summarize the history of Jainism. &mdash; 171.161.56.16 (talk) 05:19, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Graham Colm (talk) 11:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.