Wikipedia:Peer review/Upanishads/archive1

Upanishads
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because…

1. I would like to find out what I need to do before nominating it for a GA review
 * Do what I've pointed out here and you should be fine.

2. How hard it is for a person not knowledgeable with the subject to understand the topic
 * Not too bad for me. The second paragraph of New Upanishads is pushing it, though.

3. Whether I should italicize Indian/Hindu terms all the time or only at first instance
 * Only the first time.

4. Whether using IAST helps the lay-reader or whether it's impacting readability negatively
 * No problems.

5. Any other critique
 * Below.

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 05:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Haha, I happen to have covered this in Global last semester. Res Mar 02:44, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * General notes
 * Upanishads, Upanishads, Upanishads! The word is extremely repetitious throughout the article, and the biggest issue I see. Are there no alternate names?
 * Do not use complex charecters and templates in titles per WP:TITLE.
 * It's considered bad practice to mention your references by name, unless he is a major scholar on the subject, in which case he should have some mention in the article beyond the reference.
 * You say you are worried about readability. I've added quite a few links to the articles to improve it (not everyone knows who Brahmin, Socrate's dialouges, etc. are!)
 * Lead
 * One new Upanishad, the Upanishad which predates 1656 contains a list of 108 canonical  and lists itself as the final one.'' Is it a new one or the newest? Its list makes it appear as the newest one, so if it's not it needs clarification.
 * Epytmology
 * setting to rest ignorance by revealing the knowledge of the supreme spirit... Not grammatically correct, is the quote supposed to be like that? If so please add [sic].
 * End of the section needs a ref.
 * Classification
 * Table needs a note on what the yellow highlights are. Fixed by explaining
 * 1926 marked the discovery of four new by Dr. Schrader. Why is this important? Also, first name of the doctor, please.
 * Most authors discuss only the mukhya  in their works. Reference.
 * Several of the notable and widely used Shakta Upaniṣads, including the ', the ' and the  are not listed in the Mutika Upanishad. Citation needed tag; someone's beaten me to it!
 * Philosophy
 * The discovery by the Upanashidic thinkers that Atman and Brahman are one and the same is the greatest contribution made to the thought of the world. First of all, citations. Secondly, I'm curious as to why it's the greatest contribution. As it's worded, it sounds as if it's the greatest philosophical contribution of all time, or something similar.
 * Between the two, the is the more  original one. Citation.
 * Important quotations from some of the include: Cite.
 * Two forms of the non-dual Brahmin-Atman are presented in the... Non-dual?
 * A lot of refs missing in the end of the section.
 * Development of thought
 * Whole section missing citations! Fixed by providing citations
 * Worldwide transition
 * Emperor Akbar's reign (1556–1586) saw the first translations of the . Into what language? Fixed by providing information
 * Refs refs refs refs refs! Fixed by providing citations
 * Global schollarship and praise
 * Again, citations! Fixed by providing citations, one citation needed tag remains. Will wait for a week and remove claim if citations cannot be found.
 * Criticism of the Upanishads
 * The inline quotes need to be converted into standing ones with . Fixed by converting to quotes
 * It's not considered good form to strike reviewer's comments. Not to be authourative or anything, but we decide when the issue is really resolved. Cheers, Res Mar 01:25, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Just saw that others were following this practice and thought I would do the same since there's a note at the top that asks me to avoid using done/check mark images, level 1-3 headings, etc. I'm just fine fixing per your recommendations and leaving a note on your talk page at the end of it. Zuggernaut (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Brief comment by Noloop
I would trim the lead. Something like:
 * The Upanishads (Devanagari: उपनिषद्, IAST: Upaniṣad, also spelled "Upaniṣad") are philosophical texts of the Hindu religion. More than 200 are known, of which the first dozen or so, the oldest and most important, are variously referred to as the principal, main (mukhya) or old Upanishads.


 * The oldest of these, the Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads, were written during the pre-Buddhist era of India.[1][2] while the Taittiriya, Aitareya and Kausitaki, which show Buddhist influence, must have been composed after the fifth century BC:[2] the remainder of the mukhya Upanishads are dated to the first two centuries of the common era.[2] The new Upanishads were composed in the medieval and early modern period: discoveries of newer Upanishads were being reported as late as 1926.[3]


 * All Upanishads have been passed down in oral tradition. The mukhya Upanishads hold the stature of revealed texts (shruti). With the Bhagavad Gita and the Brahmasutra[10] the mukhya Upanishads provide a foundation for several later schools of Indian philosophy (vedanta), among them two influential monistic schools of Hinduism.[11][12][13]

Move the text I took out to the body. The lead shouldn't have a lot detail. Good luck! It's a worthy topic. Noloop (talk) 21:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Tisk, looks like I have to disagree with you. Again :P The lead is perfect in length for such an important topic, although there is a stay sentance I've meged into the paras. Res Mar 23:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Fixes per peer review
The following changes have been made in response to the peer review:
 * General notes
 * Upanishads, Upanishads, Upanishads! The word is extremely repetitious throughout the article, and the biggest issue I see. Are there no alternate names? -- Coulnd't fix this one because I am unaware of another name to refer to the Upanishads.
 * Do not use complex charecters and templates in titles per WP:TITLE. -- Already fixed
 * It's considered bad practice to mention your references by name, unless he is a major scholar on the subject, in which case he should have some mention in the article beyond the reference. -- Most of the scholars get mention in the article in the chronology section
 * You say you are worried about readability. I've added quite a few links to the articles to improve it (not everyone knows who Brahmin, Socrate's dialouges, etc. are!) -- Thanks!
 * Lead
 * Provided information that clarifies that Upanishads were still found after 1656.
 * Epytmology
 * That's the way it appears originally. Sounds grammatically correct if read as "The word Upanishad means setting to rest ignorance by revealing the knowledge of the supreme spirit..." Not grammatically correct, is the quote supposed to be like that? If so please add [sic].
 * Provided a citation for the end of the section
 * Classification
 * Highlighting identifies the mukhya Upanishads
 * Dr. Shrader is names; provided more information that explains why the new findings are important
 * Removed the inaccurate statement - Most authors discuss only the mukhya  in their works. Reference.
 * Cannot find citation for Several of the notable and widely used Shakta Upaniṣads, including the ', the ' and the  are not listed in the Mutika Upanishad. Will wait for a week, then remove if a source still can't be found
 * Philosophy
 * Provided citations for the authors who claim the finding of Brahman=Atman as the greatest contribution to human thought.
 * Provided citation for the claim that BU is older than CU.
 * Provided citations for the important quotations from some of the include:
 * Rephrased the two types of non-dual Brahman-Atman
 * Provided citations towards the end of the sections
 * Development of thought
 * Provided citations
 * Worldwide transition
 * Persian - added that information to the article
 * Provided citations
 * Global schollarship and praise
 * Provided citations, one citation needed tag remains. Will wait for a week and remove claim if citations cannot be found.
 * Criticism of the Upanishads
 * Converted inline quotes to template based quotes

Thanks. Zuggernaut (talk) 03:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, thats it. Good job. Res Mar 21:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spending time on this Resident Mario. It was really helpful and will help us list this article as a GA. Zuggernaut (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :) Good luck. Res Mar 00:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)