Talk:Iranshah Atash Behram

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Udvada Atash Behram/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

• I have addressed all issues raised here in the article text. Please see if any further changes are required.--Nvvchar. 04:24, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

General

• No copyvio/dablink/external link issues
• Say fire-temple or fire temple
  • Done

Lead

• What exactly is a "fire temple"?
  • Place of worship. Explained in the lead
• Indian state of Gujarat on the west coast of India Then why say "Indian state"? (also in Location)
  • Changed
• Don't repeat AD after first mention (also after lead in main article)
  • Corrected
• Gujarat is linked twice
  • Delinked
• I'm not sure if it's proper to say Mumbai, I guess it was called Bombay back then
  • Clarified
• Keep the lead within 2 paras
  • Done

Location

• Bold is not needed again
  • Bolding removed
• Change the wording a bit, it resembles the lead too much
  • Done
• The nearest Railway station No caps in "Railway"
  • Cirrected

History

• What is "agiari"?
  • Agiari is the first level of fire temple while Atash Behram is the highest grade of fire temple
• (created by Pindharas (nomadic robbers)) Omit the consecutive brackets "))"
  • Corrected
• One year later, in 1742 "in 1742" is redundant
  • Corrected

Features

• The boi ritual is enthroning "involves the enthroning of the"
  • Done

Heritage status

• Any currency conversion for "Rs.15 million"?
  • Linked Rs. to Indian rupee. In view fluctuating exchange rate giving the figures in any other currency may not be necessary

Thanks for the changes, promoted. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:31, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for promoting the article.Nvvchar. 04:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

GA removed

Per discussion at User talk:Nvvchar#Good articles, this article isn't good enough to be considered a GA. I have reverted the recent promotion. @Sainsf, Nvvchar, Dr. Blofeld, and Ritchie333: My comments there were this:

I'm also seriously worried by the articles that got promoted to GA recently (which is as much a problem for the promotor as for you). One has been unpromoted already, and when I look at the most recent one, Udvada Atash Behram, it starts with

"The Udvada Atash Behram, also known as the Iran Shah, "King of Iran", is one of the eight fire temples (holy place of worship) of the Zoroastrian religion located in Udvada in Gujarat on the west coast of India; the only other Atash Behram outside India is in central Iran at Yazd. "

which is nonsense. It is not "one of the eight located in Udvada", it is located in Udvada and one of the eight in India. The Yazd one is not "the only other one outsie India", that one is the only one outside India (without the "other" which indicates that the Udvada one is outside India). A GA which starts out in such a way should never have been promoted (and possibly also never nominated).

Other parts of the article are equally hard to understand or parse: "the earliest link of worship of the sacred fire in Zoroastrian temples is dated to the 4th century BC."? "Their stay in Sanjan lasted for about four centuries till political events took a turn. In 1297,[...]" 1297-721=576, far from "about four centuries". In 1297, they fled to a cave and stayed there for 12 years; they then moved to Bansda where they satyed 14 years, when they moved to Navsari. This happened in ... 1419? 1297 + 12 + 14 = 1323, about a century off. The sources seem to be very unclear about what happened when, but in that case the article should reflect these contradictory sources, not try to invent a chronology that doesn't make sense. For example, according to this source you use, they only arrived in Gujarat in 936, not in 716-721.

"The Atash Behram ("Iran Shah fire") is a symbolic representation of the Zoroastrian monarchy of Iran that was overthrown by Arabs"? First, Atash Behram means "Victory fire", not "Iran Shah fire". Second, their most sacred symbol, a victory fire, is actually a defeat fire? Fire, in Zoroastrianism, is a symbol of God.

In the lead, you claim that the temple was built in 1742, "the Udavada temple which was built in 1742 AD." From the sources, it looks as if the current temple was built in 1892-1894, completely replacing the older buildings (they weren't refurbished, as you write, but rebuilt, like your source[1] and others say). The architect you give for the temple is the one active in 1892, not one active in 1742.

The above is a spotcheck, not necessarily a list of all problems with the article. Being confusing, having a very unclear and disputed chronology, and the problems with who built it and when, are the main problems I now see. Fram (talk) 09:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

DYK error

Note that the temple as pictured was not built in 1742: the 1742 version was replaced in 1892-1984 by the current, pictured one. Fram (talk) 09:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

edits updating information on Iranshah Atashbehram and rectifying grammatical errors giving information, all edits reversed

Since yesterday I have worked to improve the wiki on Iranshah Atashbehram both by updating information on the subject as well as correcting several grammatical errors and editing some statements to make better sense and more informative, all these edits are entirely reversed and the article sadly returned fully to the status before these edits, the article back to a state lacking vital information and grammatical errors The purpose of improving an article to make it meet the high standards of Wikipedia defeated Would a senior editor please look into this strangely unjustified deletions of good genuine edits 125.239.198.129 (talk) 23:04, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@125.239.198.129

please read link as Iranshah Atash Behram and not Iranshah Atashbehram 125.239.198.129 (talk) 23:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)