Talk:Naraka (Hinduism)

Original research in the 'narrative, social and economic section'

Original research is warranted. The prose also is not encylopaedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordtalbut (talk • contribs) 18:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Naraka (Hinduism)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dwaipayanc (talk · contribs) 18:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Passing this article. It is indeed an interesting article, offering information on different type of hells. The description is sometimes quite repugnant, but enjoyable.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

added narrative, social and economic section. --Allenpercussion (talk) 11:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

The narrative, social, and economic section seems highly interpretive without adequate citations. The whole section adds little to understanding hell. A big chunk rather it is an interpretation of a scene from the MBh that is entirely subjective. The voice also reads like spiritual advice more than an encyclopedia. Should all be removed.Iṣṭa Devatā (talk) 15:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Naraka (Hinduism). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121113025849/http://vedabase.net/sb/5/26/en2 to http://vedabase.net/sb/5/26/en2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:33, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

The comparison to the Christian and Islamic concept of "Hell" creates a misunderstanding.

Naraka is only similar to Hell in that it is a state or place of suffering for "wicked" people.

The comparison otherwise is invalid and creates an unneeded parallel with a concept from a different culture.

A more culturally neutral term would be better suited for this article. 92.40.203.56 (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)