 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Keep translation exactly as in the source?
editThe translation, which the references say has been taken from a book by P Venkatesh Rao, has since undergone a number of edits: names have been changed to IAST spelling and some words here and there seem to have been edited. My question: should it remain a literal quote of the referenced source?
For the time being, I will leave the IAST spelling and just correct the other deviations.
Update: I’ve made some changes, but I get the feeling my source is not the same book as the one cited, even though all the details seem correct: https://archive.org/details/dli.ernet.382194/page/691/mode/2up
Therefore, I have left in different wordings that didn’t seem to change the meaning, even though the whole thing isn’t very satisfying this way.
Any suggestions are very welcome!--Geke (talk) 04:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
- It is not a literal quote of the referenced source. The translation has been made more succinct by referring to the original commentary in Sanskrit (a language I have academically studied and am familiar with).
- What was the need for the different wordings? Prajnaana (talk) 17:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Note
editI have removed original research from this article, since it seemed to be original synthesis, which is not allowed. Also it seemed to be promotional in tone. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 20:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)