Talk:Hoysala literature

Silly and stupid insinuations

The article is edited thus: "In 1116, Hoysala King Vishnuvardhana defeated the Cholas of Tanjore and annexed Gangavadi (modern southern Karnataka),[15] thus bringing the region back under native rule. In the following decades, with the waning of the Chalukya power, the Hoysalas proclaimed independence and grew into one of most powerful ruling families of southern India.[2][16] Consequently, literature in Kannada, the local language, flourished in the Hoysala empire."

The question that rises now is that from the time the Chola occupation of Gangavadi started, was there no development of Kannada literature or whatever literature that sought to develop, in Kannada, was stifled somehow by the Chola rule. The article also seeks to negatively portray and assumes a diabolic POV in suggesting that after defeat of the Cholas, and resumption of "native" rule the literature in Kannada "consequently" started flourishing. I would claim that if that was the case then lot of Tamil literature would have emerged from Kannada country (in the period of occupation of Gangavadi) from around 1000 AD when Raja Raja Chola occupied Gangavadi till 1116 when it went back under "native" rule.

The fact is that there is no connection whatsoever with the development or lack of it, of Kannada literature, with occupation of Gangavadi by the Cholas or indeed its being regained by the Hoysalas under Vishnuvardhana, from the Cholas. I can also quote from other books by other authors like K.A.Nilakanta Sastri etc. all of whom speak independently about the development of Kannada literature over the centuries including under the Hoysalas, but no one has made this unique assumption, presumption and the consequent statement that flourishing of Kannada literature in the Hoysala empire (mainly if not only) after regaining of Gangavadi from the Cholas. Yes, Gangavadi was the base of the Hoysalas in the Mysore plateau, but it is fallacious to presume that because Gangavadi was with the Cholas Kannada literature could not flourish there as a consequence. Also, it is wrong to assume (if that was sought to be conveyed) that Cholas caused suppression of Kannada literature during their occupation of Gangavadi. The Cholas have never been known to suppress local literature, including of their overseas territories either in Sri Lanka or in S.E.Asia.

I guess the above are reasons strong enough to justify removal of the lines "In 1116, Hoysala King ................In the decades," It makes perfect logic to write thus: With the waning of Chalukya power, the Hoysalas regained independence...... etc. etc."

Srirangam99 (talk) 06:47, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Silly spelling error

When talking about measures in poetry the word is "meters" not "metres". "Metres" can only be used of the SI unit of distance. First time I've seen a howler like this on the article of the day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.118.45 (talk) 01:45, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Comment

In the overview section there is a link to Bhagavata in a sentence that groups it with the Ramayana and Mahabharat. Since the Bhagavata article doesn't refer to any literature, I assume it must either be talking about the Bhagavad Gita or the Bhagavata Purana. It currenlty doesn't link to either of these articles and is quite ambigous so I suggest clarifying which text is it referring to. Gizza^{Discuss ©} 13:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. It refers to tales of Krishna but with a Jain angle.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyediting

Happy to help. Looking quickly, it looks like you're using en-dashes without spaces a lot. If the meaning is a pause (where you might see parentheses, ellipses or colons) instead of "between", then use either spaced en-dashes or unspaced em-dashes.

Do you mean like this:- instead of "who pleases the queen with kicks and whip lashes–a story that has piqued the interest of modern research", use "who pleases the queen with kicks and whip lashes – a story that has piqued the interest of modern research" OR "who pleases the queen with kicks and whip lashes—a story that has piqued the interest of modern research".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

Ok. I will change it as soon as you are done, to avoid eit conflict. from what I understand, I just need to be consistant.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Lead section:

• I'm American, and I only have a little experience with Indian English. I think Indian articles ought to sound Indian, so please look over my copyediting carefully, and if you see anything that doesn't sound right to your ear, either ask me about it or just change it. Hopefully I'll learn something about Indian English in the process.

Thanks. The spellings are all British for consistancy. I fully appreciate your comment "Indian articles ought to sound Indian", though I am afraid I have been bitten by skeptical reviewers about this issue.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

That's what good copyeditors are for: biting back. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

• It used to be that they really didn't like citations in the lead at FAC (with a few exceptions, such as for quotes). These days, I'm seeing more and more citations in the lead, but they might say you've got too many. If material is repeated between the lead and sections below, the citation should generally go in the sections below. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I know exactly what you mean. Again, skeptical reviewers who are not patient enough to read the entire article forced me to take this approach. I can club citations in the lead ,like: "Kamath (2001), p. 100; Adiga (2000), p. 200" etc. This way it looks nicer. How does that sound?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that might help to reduce the total number of citations. I don't think this issue will be a problem at FAC; if the reviewers want fewer citations in the lead, they will say so, and then you can just move them down into the article. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Will club citations with repeat page numbers anyway, once you are done with cpedits.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Literature in the Hoysala Empire#Overview

• "Consequently, literature in Kannada, the local language, received impetus": "received impetus" doesn't sound right to me.

I can change it to "flourished".Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

That works for me. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

Done Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I don't understand what the paragraph that starts "Literary developments in the Hoysala empire" is saying.

Here, I am trying to break up the types of literary developments based on sects of Hinduism, Jainism, purely non-courtly devotional, secular literature etc.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't this paragraph be one sentence? It looks like your second sentence doesn't have a verb. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

It is meant to be one continuous sentence. Please fix it as you see right. There are seven important developments listed in all.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I don't know what "expositions" means in "the expositions of Shaivism".

Here it means Expository preaching, since it pertains to a new religion that was taking birth at that time. Later on, the Veerashaiva religion sort of merged with Hinduism.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Did they write about someone else's preaching, or did they preach in their writings? I think a link to Expository preaching would help. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

Both.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I can only really speak for American English although I believe this is true world-wide: I deleted the commas in "His nephew, Raghavanka (1200)," based on my guess that we don't know for sure that he only had one nephew. If we do know that, then the commas are are technically correct, but in this case, I would write "only nephew".
• Also in that sentence, I put "(1200)" after the name of the work. It's perfectly okay to have the date after the author when the work isn't specifically mentioned, as you do with "Harihara (1160) penned poems in the ragale metre in Siva-ganada-ragalegalu."

- Dan Dank55 (talk) (mistakes) 20:14, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• It seems reasonable to me to use hyphens in infoboxes where en-dashes would be used in the text (1217-1235), and the fact that Epbr didn't object is a good sign, but some reviewers may complain. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Will fix it.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Done Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm changing "treatises on poetry" to "poetry" just to keep it parallel. If you want to mention the treatises specifically, that could be done before or after that list. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Writings on poetry does convey the message that the book did not actually contain poems but the "rules" by which poems could be written, which in this was on the "flavour" (Sringara) of poetics.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 20:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• "Mallikarjuna, the noted anthologist (1245)..." Okay, now I'm not sure what the dates mean...what do they mean? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 21:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

His anthology is dated 1245 CE. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Janna's date doesn't match up with the date in the infobox. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 21:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Jannas first writing Yashodhara Charite is dated 1209, and his later writing Ananthanatha purana is dated 1230. I will change the infobox to just 1209.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, the text said 1207, I changed it to 1209. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes)

• What's the nature of the "interaction" between Kannada and Telugu? Did they exchange words, did the two languages become similar, or did people tend to become bilingual? - Dan Dank55 (talk)

Being born from the same hypothesised Dravidian root (sometime around 1500-1000 BCE), they do have similarities, though they are entirely different but neighbouring languages. In this case, some writers became bilingual. Some others freely used words from one language while writing literature in the other. Often writings original to one language was translated to the other.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've moved on to the next section, make a change there if you like. I think after reading "given encouragement, which caused interaction", FAC reviewers might ask: what encouragement, what interaction? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 22:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• Okay I'm done with Overview, I'll move on to the next subsection (so feel free to edit in Overview if you like). - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 22:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Literature in the Hoysala Empire#Jain epics:

• "Pampa Bharatha of Adikavi Pampa" should be either "the Pampa Bharatha of Adikavi Pampa" or "Pampa Bharatha by Adikavi Pampa"; I guessed "the". - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 22:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

yes, thats right.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, done with this subsection. I see you have an offer from Finetooth to copyedit, so I'll leave it there. You might want to look through my changes, and if they're acceptable, make the same kinds of changes in the rest of the article, then bring Finetooth in. I'll be happy to look it over when you guys are finished. Give me a shout if you're having any trouble when this gets to FAC. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 23:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Unless you are busy with other things, you could complete the copy edit of the whole article, even tommorow is fine. I will certianly make necessary edits from what I have learnt from you above.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, I am busy, but all the edits to the part that I edited look good, and I looked quickly at what Finetooth has been doing...it looks like you're in good hands. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 15:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Confusion in one place

Things went fairly smoothly until I got to the last paragraph of the "Age of Harihara". I'm having trouble with "Kereya Padmarasa (1165), a Veerashaiva poet patronised by king Narasimha I wrote Dikshabodhe in the ragale metre and would become the protagonist of a later work Padmarajapurana; the brahmin poets, Deva Kavi (1200) who authored a romance piece called Kusumavali, and Kavi Kama (12th century), the author of a treatise called Sringara-ratnakara on the rasa (flavor) of poetical sentiment." I'm confused about the meaning. Does the first part of this mean that the poet, Padmarasa, became the main character in a work by Padmarajapurana? I'm also confused by the list of three writers. It seems to be a sentence without a main verb. Finetooth (talk) 03:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

No. Padmarasa became the hero of a writing called Padmarajapurana (whose date and author I can find later today, but was perhaps from 14-16th century). Kavi Kama, Deva Kavi are independent poets of 12th century. One authored a romance novel, the other, a treatise on poetry.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

• Another question. What are the double dates in the Reference section? "Ayyar, P. V. Jagadisa [1993] (1993)" is an example. Finetooth (talk) 04:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

The first one is original publish date, the second is subsequent publishing date if any, Perhaps if they are the same, then one should be removed.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 13:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

OK. I'll leave it to you to fix the Padmarasa paragraph. I've worked my way through to the end of the article, and I've done as much as I can. My knowledge of the topic is nearly zero. I'd suggest one more run-through by a third editor to catch anything I might have missed. My best. Finetooth (talk) 16:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. As I had guessed, the writing in which Padmarasa became the protagonist was written in c.1400.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

This article has been trolled

Someone fix it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.82.239 (talk) 17:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)