 | The contents of the Bhartrhari's paradox page were merged into Bhartṛhari on 10 March 2019 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
The topic of this article does not so much seem to be a specific "Bhartrhari's paradox", but the fact that Bhartrhari in the 5th century included a discussion of linguistic paradoxes into his treatise. It goes without saying that this is relevant to any discussion of the history of the study of linguistic paradoxes, as well as to the study of Bhartrhari and Gupta era Indian linguistics, but it does not seem to make much sense as a standalone article. --dab (𒁳) 09:07, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
- The article does not even identify any paradox as its topic, despite being in Self-referential paradoxes and {{Logical paradoxes}}. The first sentence indicates that the topic of the article is Herzberger & Herzberger's paper, but then it immediately begins discussing Vākyapadīya itself.__Gamren (talk) 13:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
- Regarding the June 2015 merge proposal, to merge Bhartrhari's paradox to Vākyapadīya, I note that the latter has subsequently been merged and no longer exists as a stand-alone article. However, the argument that the Bhartrhari's paradox doesn't need its own page (nor is even a coherent topic) still hold. The dilemma seems to be whether to merge to Bhartṛhari#Vākyapadīya, Bhartṛhari itself, or Sphoṭa#Vākyapadīya (the merge destination of the original Vākyapadīya page). I'm proposing the Bhartṛhari page, as the content seems to fit marginally better, given the paradox page is not primarily about sphota. Klbrain (talk) 15:09, 30 September 2017 (UTC)