Talk:Deshastha Brahmin

Deshastha by Marriage

We have two non-maharashtrian ladies married to Deshstha men mentioned under "Prominent Deshastha". What do contributors think of that ? Are these ladies Deshastha or not ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.187.17.229 (talk • contribs) 19:40, December 21, 2006 (UTC)

Kuladeva

the part where it says that no avatara of Vishnu except is kuladeva for Deshastha Brahmins is incorrect. my area was mainly deshastha brahmins and the area's kuladeva was always some avatara of Vishnu. there are other areas too - this community and others also having avataras of Vishnu as kuladevas is a sizeable one within the Deshastha community in Karnataka. please correct this. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.91.63 (talk • contribs) 02:04, July 15, 2009 (UTC)

Renominated

Just wanted to let all contributors know that I've renominated the article for a GA review (Wikipedia:Ga_nominations#Social_sciences_and_society). Thanks for all the help in improving the article. Zuggernaut (talk) 23:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Addition of details of festivals

The recent addition of the details of festivals has the following problems:

1. Parts of it may not comply with WP:MOS.
2. The last paragraph is too long and needs to be split.
3. The entire edit may be WP:UNDUE since these festivals are not specific to Deshastha Brahmins. Pretty much all Maharashtrian communities (and all of India in some cases) celebrate/observe them. That goes not just for festivals but also for a number of ceremonies too. Would you get rid of that too ?
4. The content is better off in the respective separate list - List of festivals of Deshastha, Konkanastha and Karhade Brahmins. ditto as previous bullet.
5. A second rationale for WP:UNDUE is that unless there are specific sources that say Deshastha Brahmins were the original community who devised/started observing these festivals, we cannot have so much detail in the article. I will soon get those references. Deshastha being the religious leaders either initiated or gave religious sanctions to the festivals
6. A one line summary for each festival may be alright.It is mostly one line summary

Zuggernaut (talk) 16:41, 11 December 2010 (UTC) 24.187.26.104 (talk) 21:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Deshastha Brahmin/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: -- Cirt (talk) 05:50, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 05:50, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of December 20, 2010, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Fails here. Sourcing concerns throughout. Large chunks of unsourced text. Problematic issues with flow and organization, including very large paragraphs in some places, and instances of extremely short paragraphs in others.

2. Factually accurate?: Fails here. Quick fail. Section Festivals tagged with needing additional citations for verification. (Also odd template which appears to be a footer template displayed at the top of that section, that should be moved.) Lots of citation needed tags still present at time of GA Review.

3. Broad in coverage?: Festivals sect seems disorganized, with smatterings of info presented. There is indeed lots of text, but presentation, structure and overall organization of it could be greatly improved.

4. Neutral point of view?: Talk page has raised some questions about the Festivals sect, I would recommend posting to talk pages of multiple related WikiProjects for some outside input regarding this.

5. Article stability? Lots of recent activity, including some questionable IP edits from earlier this month. Would recommend keeping a close eye on that. Talk page inspection shows unresolved section, Addition of details of festivals.

6. Images?: Some of the images have been subject to analysis at Wikimedia Commons, suggesting all the images could benefit from an independent image review check.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— -- Cirt (talk) 04:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Renomination

All of the problems pointed out in the previous failed good article review have been fixed and I've renominated the article. Thanks for helping fix the citations and improving the article! Zuggernaut (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Deshastha Brahmin in now GA (finally!)

The article has finally been listed as a good article, almost 6 months after it had its first peer review in August 2010. I want to thank everyone who spent precious time in expanding, improving and copyediting the article, particularly:

anon 24.187.26.104
anon 74.9.96.122
anon 146.145.214.190
user:Shakher59
user:SMasters
user:Redtigerxyz
Zuggernaut (talk) 14:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations! Finally! Well done to all who worked so hard to make this happen. Good work! – SMasters (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2011 (UTC)