Talk:Śrī Sūkta

Deletions

I made some deletion of all the irrelavant information. And, tried to leave the most important relavent portions. I think that this page SHOULD be deleted. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 05:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

• Merge any relevant info with Sri Suktam. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA has moved the information from the other page here, and I have redirected to this page. As of now, Sri Suktam, Sri suktam, Sri Sukta, and Sri sukta redirect to the same page. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

A quick note for future use: when moving content from one article to another, you should mention in the edit summary where the content is being copied from. This is required in order to maintain a attribution trail in compliance with the legal GFDL requirements (this is also the reason that the other article is made into a redirect rather than being deleted). See WP:MERGE for details. Abecedare (talk) 00:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Will do! Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 05:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Translations/Transliterations

What's really bugging me now is the translations and transliterations provided - not exactly adhering to WP:MOS. It should probably be deleted, and links should be provided instead, but I'm not sure. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 23:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

You are right. There are two problems with the current translations/transliteration:

1. They are unsourced.
2. Such extensive quotes belong, and are welcome, on wikisource (as long as there are no copyright issues.)

Feel free to delete the content (it will always be available in the article history, if someone wants to access it). The article could also benefit with copyediting and, most importantly, sourcing. I'll see what I can do about the latter. Abecedare (talk) 00:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the quotes; they can still be accessed in this version of the article, in case somebody wants to read/use them. Abecedare (talk) 04:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

The article looks better now - thanks. I have also added a link to the Sanskrit text and a translation, and others have been added as well. WikiSource does have an abridged translation, which has also been added to the external links section. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 16:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Guys I would suggest replacing "Khilanis" with Khilas, since Khilani is plural of Khila, adding an s is redundant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.93.58.72 (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Significance section

So how can the significance section be cleaned up? What needs to be cleaned or adjusted? Please let me know.Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 05:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I took out the first paragraph of the section. It was too personal and not "a matter-of-fact". It looks better. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 05:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Still needs much cleanup - I will try to work on this. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 16:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! I have some more content for the text section that I will add over the next couple of days. Abecedare (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I have done some research on the script and the text of Sri Suktam. I can upload the pdf file. Please can any of you guide me. (Srirama Srinivasan - Dubai) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.132.45.37 (talk) 10:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Bettering the page

Hey, guys, I am very thankful that we can help each other, comprimise with one another to improve articles. It actually is quite nice. Please Shruti and everyone, let know what is wrong and I'll change them. Shruti, please help me to change what you think I did wrong. Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 17:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

What you did wrong? I didn't say you did on this article... But I do think that some cleanup of the article and LOTS of expansion would help a lot. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

O.K., when I have some more time I will try to help with cleaning up and expansion. Can you please give example of areas to be expanded.Govinda Ramanuja dasa USA (talk) 08:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

There are two other articles in the Wikipedia that throw more light on the Goddess Lakshmi. they are Goddess Lakshmi and Varalakshmi Vratam. In fact when compared to the first article 'Goddess Lakshmi' this article looks like a note prepared by a student who is appearing for examination. This article on a famous topic like Sri Sktam needs further expansionn.B.K.S7 (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2021 (UTC) B.K.Satyanarayana ````

Lead/Intro

The lead is VERY small - needs much expansion. WP:LEAD states that a lead should be up to four paragraphs long and be able to stand alone as a summary of the article - this lead isn't even close, lacking information and length. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 01:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)