Talk:Pāṇini

BNF?

Now that this page is semiprotected, would it still make sense to add a reference to Backus–Naur Form (BNF) as that page refers to this Pāṇini page? According to the history section of that page, the connection is so strong, BNF could as easily have been called Pāṇini Backus form. I (yes, just another drive by IP) was thinking about the See Also section here.

Following MOS:ACCESSIBILITY for "Panini" vs "Pāṇini"

Hello @Asteramellus

I noticed you reverted my edits that changed repeated instances of "Pāṇini" (with diacritics) to the simplified "Panini" form, keeping the IAST version only in the first occurrence within brackets.  

I made this change following Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines and standard practices:

The Manual of Style specifies that unrecognized characters may be "pronounced as a question mark or omitted entirely from the speech output". Based on the guideline,  "Provide a transliteration for all text in a non-Latin writing system where the non-Latin character is important in the original context such as names, places, things etc."  

The common practice across Wikipedia is to provide the full IAST form (with diacritics) on the first mention (typically in the lead section), and use the simplified English form without diacritics for subsequent occurrences. This balances scholarly accuracy with readability and accessibility.

Excessive diacritics can make text harder to read for a general audience and may cause technical issues for users with certain browsers or assistive technologies.

My intention is to follow the accessibility guidelines while maintaining the article's scholarly integrity by keeping the IAST form in the lead section where it properly introduces the subject.

Looking forward to your thoughts. VerdictByLogic (talk) 15:02, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

@VerdictByLogic Thanks. I have seen both with diacritics and without diacritics on articles, so don't think there is a strict policy either way. I think what matters most is consistency (at least within a section) and scholarly usage. My revert was for repeated alternate spelling and I see that you have changed it to use "Panini" - I agree that "Panini" is more readable, but using the diacritic form would also be fine here. Asteramellus (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

@Asteramellus

Thank you for your response. I understand your point, but I'd like to share my perspective on this.

The diacritic form is primarily meant to indicate correct pronunciation, which is certainly valuable for scholarly accuracy. However, in practical terms, most users do not search for articles using diacritics. For example, I searched for "Panini" (without diacritics) and wasn't able to reach the page directly. If the article title or repeated instances use only the IAST form, it becomes much harder for the average reader to find or recognize the page.

My intention was to balance accessibility with accuracy by keeping the full IAST form in the lead section (within brackets) while using the simplified "Panini" throughout the rest of the article. VerdictByLogic (talk) 06:32, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

This is interesting. I did try searching for "Panini" in the search bar and the autocomplete dropdown does not show "Pāṇini", but selecting "Search for pages containing Panini" does return Pāṇini article.

For your point for usage in the body, it is on an article by article basis - see MOS:DIACRITICS. As I mentioned, I have seen both with diacritics and without diacritics on articles and agree that without diacritics is easier for readers. Asteramellus (talk) 23:47, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Suggestion Edit on Panini

If possible can the editors give information that Panini was born in brahmin family. This is not to promote Casteism or Caste Supremacy but regard Panini's birth. Source: https://archive.org/details/in.gov.ignca.4695/page/n35/mode/2up Indian linguistic studies : festschrift in honor of George Cardona Page 245 Rama1234567 (talk) 00:02, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

@Rama1234567 Thanks for the suggestion and the source. I don't think this should be added as a fact - seems not much clear information about Panini's life. Also, just wondering - has Cardona mentioned anything about Panini's family background? Asteramellus (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Him being Brahmin is quite clear though don't think it is unclear (Not trying to promote Casteism). Vettam Mani has mentioned in his book "Puranic encyclopedia" this information regarding Panini: Jaimini and Bhartrhari have stated that Panini was a Sista. Sistas were brahmins well-versed in the Sastras and devoid of earthly pleasures. As far as I am aware, I could be wrong, please correct me if so but Cardona focuses more on Ashtadhyayi/ Paninian Rules rather than India known to Panini, or his biography. The only book which talks about Panini and his biographical life to some extent is the above book by Vasudev Sharan Agrawal. I could be wrong. Would be happy to be corrected. Will try to find if Cardona mentioned anything about his family background. Should I instead frame it as "some writers refer to Panini as brahmin but overall much information is not known about his life". Can I add that. Please let know. Thanks Rama1234567 (talk) 04:04, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

https://archive.org/details/puranicencyclopa00maniuoft/page/566/mode/2up Rama1234567 (talk) 04:05, 1 July 2026 (UTC)