सफलता का प्रवेश द्वार

नामविश्व भाषान्तरणम्‌ संपादित करें

प्रिय बन्धुवर्यः, मीडियाविकी इत्यस्याः सॉफ्टवेयर-प्रोग्रामर द्वारा संस्कृतभाषायां विकीपीडियासंस्करणे उपयुक्तपरिवर्तनार्थं वयं अधोहस्ताक्षरकृताः जनाः निम्नानुरोधाः अस्मिन्‌ https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ जालपत्रे स्थातुं वाञ्छन्ति।--Manidiwakar ०९:५२, ७ मेय् २०१० (UTC)

Undersigned requests openions or support from those who know Sanskrit Language.Please do reply at your earliest or post your comment directly at संस्कृत विकिपीडिया:ग्रामस्य चौपालम्--Mahitgar १५:०३, १ पौषमाघे २००९ (UTC)

Dear Wikimedia Programmers, Since undersigned wants to create new articles in Sanskrit Language Wikipedia specialy in "Wikipedia" and "Help" Namespace;Correction in Namespace Names will help me and Sanskrit Language Wikipedia a Long way. We kindly request following localisation of Sanskrit Language Wikipedia at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/

  • Namespace Current English Name 'Wikipedia' change the same to Sanskrit विकिपीडिया
    • Namespace Current semi-English Name 'Wikipediaसंभाषणं' change the same to Sanskrit विकिपीडिया संभाषणं
  • Namespace Current English Name 'MediaWiki' change the same to Sanskrit मिडियाविकि
    • Namespace Current English Name 'MediaWiki talk' change the same to Sanskrit मिडियाविकि संभाषणं
  • Namespace Current English Name 'Template' change the same to Sanskrit बिंबधर
    • Namespace Current English Name 'Template talk' change the same to Sanskrit बिंबधर संभाषणं
  • Namespace Current Sanskrit Name 'उपकार:'(stands for 'Help') change the same to Sanskrit साहाय्य
    • Namespace Current Sanskrit Name 'उपकारसंभाषणं' (stands for 'Help talk') change the same to Sanskrit साहाय्य संभाषणं

Notes: 1)बिंबधर is a newly created applied term for Template.बिंब means an image that can transclude,and since a wikipedia template holds and helps transclude an image term created in sanskrit is बिंबधर

2)Help Namespace 'उपकार:' is being requested to be changed since 'उपकार:' means 'favour' where as right word for 'Help' in Sanskrit is available and is साहाय्य so this namespace change is being requested.

Please do reply at your earliest or post your comment directly at संस्कृत विकिपीडिया:ग्रामस्य चौपालम् --Mahitgar १५:०३, १ पौषमाघे २००९ (UTC)

Though I am not a great expert on Sanskrit, I do agree that second change to use "Sahay" instead of "upkar" makes sense. This is from my understanding of other indian languages , especially Hindi.

अहं समर्थन करोति| I agree with all the namespaces suggested, though I am not master or formally qualified in Sanskrit, but have studied sanskrit and am continuing studying it informally by reading scriptures and their translations, which has taught me a lot.--Dsvyas १२:५८, १४ पौषमाघे २००९ (UTC)

विश्वकोश or विज्ज्ञानकोश ? संपादित करें

Dear Naveen Sankar,Thaksforyour proof reading support at बिंबधर:मुखपृष्ठ सुस्वागतम्.Certainly I do not have required level of depth to make final decesion on proper translation of encyclopedia is विश्वकोश or विज्ज्ञानकोश ; at सम्भाषणसंस्कृतम शब्दकोशः I found विश्वकोश as available translation. May be you are using word विज्ज्ञानकोश as विज्ज्ञान means wisdom also. If it is so then ok but I wish you give one more consideration that in contemporary language majiority uses word विज्ज्ञान for sciences, and since scope of encyclopedia is beyond sciences visitors for one layman visitor will get confused and may avoid contributtions to non science subjects and for second that majiority of Sanskrit knowing peopel are not sciences and technology friendly and might avoid to go beyond introductory paregraph because of science word so My humble request is to think of continuation of विश्वकोश word; ofcourse fianal decesion I will leave to experts like you. Thanks and Regards --Mahitgar १५:३३, ४ फाल्गुने २००९ (UTC)

नमस्ते महीत्गर्, I am not an expert in sanskrit, actcually I know only thr basicd. Eventhough, as far as my knowledge, sanskrit words have meaning some what different from that they have in their common usage in hindi, marathi, gujarati etc. For example विज्ञान in sanskrit means 'wisdom' or 'special knowledge' while the same word means 'science' in hindi. But if we make a compromise for hindi, we will have to suffer a lot in other parts of the sanskrit encyclopedia. There are much more citations - like अन्तरिक्ष in hindi means space, but in sanskrit it means atmosphere. And for science, the common usage in sanskrit is शास्त्रम्, not विज्ञान. And please remember that here we are creating a sanskrit encyclopedia, not a hindi/marathi/bangali one. विश्वकोश: is a fare translation for encyclopedia. But the word doesn't convey the entire meaning of an encyclopedia. विश्व means 'World' and कोश means 'Cell' or Collection. But विज्ञानकोश: is a better word for encyclopedia as it means collection of wisdom / knowledge. And please remember, the spoken sanskrit dictionary is also like wikipedia. any one can edit it. So I hope we can change to विज्ञानकोश: or to विश्वविज्ञानकोश:. Expecting your positive reply --Naveen Sankar ०४:५७, १० फाल्गुने २००९ (UTC)

विकिपीडिया:लोगो,लेखन चर्चा संपादित करें

Request was made at [bugzill bug no.16857] bugzill has requested that,The image should be no bigger than 135 x 155 pixels, please fix it and reopen this bug. undersigned does not have requisite skills needed for the same please some one do help by providing needful change to bugzilla.Thanks and regards--Mahitgar ०७:५८, ८ फेब्रुवारी २००९ (UTC)

(Copyright image from Marathi Language wikipedia is being taken for using as matches with gramatically correct Sanskrit language wording and writing system.Image was posted by user user:कौस्तुभ on Marathi Language Wikipedia & commons as authorised logo for Marathi Language Wikipedia and the same is proposed tobe used on Sanskrit Language Wikipedia )   sa:चित्रं:Wikipedia-logo-mr.png

Image is updated

समर्थन करोति Mahitgar ०९:२०, १ पौषमाघे २००९ (UTC)

Please see and vote which one is better or suggest a new one: mr:चित्र:wiki1.png mr:चित्र:wiki3.png mr:चित्र:myWiki4.png - कोल्हापुरी १३:२९, ९ फेब्रुवारी २००९ (UTC)
I like the one borrowed from Marathi Wikipedia -- sa:चित्रं:Wikipedia-logo-mr.png
अभय नातू १६:२९, १२ वैशाखज्येष्ठे २००९ (UTC)

How do we best translate Wikipedia The free encyclopedia to Sanskrit?

Wikipedia=विकिपीडिया the free encyclopedia = मुक्त: विश्वकोशम्

Please comment. Thanks--Eukesh १२:५७, २ आषाढश्रावणे २००७ (UTC)

My own knowledge of Sanskrit isn't good enough for this! What type of free does मुक्त: mean? No cost or freedom to edit? गिरिक ०५:४४, ८ आषाढश्रावणे २००७ (UTC)
Wikipedia in Pali is called विकिकोष (विकि 'wiki' + कोष 'dictionary, reference work'), so I don't see why we shouldn't use a similar name. (I would suggest the slightly more normalized spelling विकिकोशः-- with a visarga.) 'The Free Encyclopedia' would be (with proper sandhi) मुकतो विश्वकोशः . (मुक्त is free as in speech). --शिवः ०३:२१, ९ आषाढश्रावणे २००७ (UTC)
Gentlemen, 'Mukta' means 'free' as in 'free from any boundations'. For instance, a free bird is a 'muktpakshi'; a man freed from slavery is declared to be mukt; a soul free from the cycle of reincarnation is a 'muktaatmaa'. It cannot be used to portray free as in free of cost. It can, however be used to express free from copyright. The precise expression for the term free of cost would be nih-shulka or rather nishulk, which would literary mean devoid of any fee.
The current expression for Sanskrit Wikipedia, that is in use, is 'Swatantravishwavigyankoshah'. In my humble opinion it completely wrong. Swatantra is free as in sovereign; literary - 'having its own system [of governance]'. I have a limited experience of reading Sanskrit plays in original; and I have never come across an instance when this term was used to refer to anything but nation states.
The word Kosh does not properly means dictionary or reference work. Even though in Hindi language the word is used for that purpose. Etymologically, kosh is place of storage or rather safekeeping. The State Exchequer or rather the Royal Exchequer was refered to as Raj-Kosh.
In My opinion it wold be safer to seek expert advice on this matter from professors of any esteemed university. I would be happy to contact The Banaras Hindu University, whenever I visit the city of Varanasi in future. I request all of you to contact your local experts. ०७:२३, २४ एप्रिल् २०१० (UTC) Prateek Mishra, (creativelipi.prateek @ gmail.com)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

मुख्यपृष्ठम् conetnt संपादित करें

I want to strongly recommend that we drop दिनविशेषम् section from sanskrit wikipedia.Although this section looks simple at first look it is not so is very very heavy on time and effort consumption. And unfortunately we at sanskrit wikipedia do not have enough editorial manhour support to tkae care of that.If existing people first go for that articles will suffer very badly.

Secondly I will prefer 2 sections on main page that one gives links to Online sanskrit learning resources the second section gives info on Sanskrit teaching Universities and other sanskrit teaching centers.

On articles side we identify and target some 100 articles to full length, and some 5000 articles only first para in sanskrit.These first paras always be done maintain by high level experts. And we allow 2 show and hide sections first to include just transliteration to non devnagari script,and second to include translations of first para in all Indian languages. So it will be easier for people with leeser sanskrit knowledge like me to contribute while learning from the ideal one.

Rest of the people who do not have fluency in snskrit should also be allowed to contribute in second para onwards.

After acomplishing of first 5000 articles with first para then we take further target of 5000 in batches.

As I said let us have a policy of first para pure sanskrit , the rest of para let people use and import as many loan words from other languages as possible.Only pronouns only maintain in pure sanskrit ,import verbs wherever palatable and sankritise them as a धातू. While taking loan word first give preference to verbs of any indian language then to rest of the world langugaes and where we can not create words from धातू then agian from indian languge and not available in indian languge then world languges.The purpose is let languge flow as people languge and let sanskrit wikipedia become hub of inter languge cooperation for all indian languge wikipedia.

Well people can dis agree with me but let us please mention your disagreements here.

Mahitgar ०५:५०, १२ अक्टूबरमासः २००९ (UTC)

I agree this part to make Sanskrit Wikipedia as hub of inter language co-operation for all Indian Language Wikipedia. All Wikipedians who can speak any Indian Language can contribute here and experts can give light on them. Experts need to take care on maintaining the inter-communication with fixing typos, translation difficult words and other stuffs. All other people can help grow this wikipedia. Growth of Sanskrit Wikipdia should directly relate to growth of Indic Wikipedia and Open Knowledge. Ujjwol

Corrections required in main page संपादित करें

The word विकिपीडिय is written as विकिपीडिया in some places. Why old logo is used in main page when new logo is available? --Shijualex १६:०३, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

Will look into it. Yes Michael?Talk १६:१०, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
Actually, I think it is supposed to be विकिपीडिया itself. Or am I wrong? Yes Michael?Talk १६:१५, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

//I think it is supposed to be विकिपीडिया itself.//

Sorry, you need to attend a Sanskrit class :). --Shijualex १६:२४, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

I was referring to the discussion we had in a mailing list along with Naveen Sankar regarding the name, I do not know the outcome of the discussion, so I asked. Yes Michael?Talk १६:२७, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
Here is the link to new logo. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-sa.svg. Discuss it in community and ask for suggestions before applying for any logo update. --Shijualex १७:३६, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
Okay. Yes Michael?Talk १७:५६, १९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

Hello all,

Some of the Wikipedia images used in the main page reads विकिपीडिया, whereas the logo should read विकिपीडिय. I need the community's approval to change all of that to the correct spelling. Kindly comment. Yes Michael?Talk ०६:११, २० मेय् २०११ (UTC)

Both the forms seems good for me. I guess there has already been a discussion over this and people have settled for विकिपीडिय. I will also support this form. Moreover, it is easy to make verb-tense forms out of विकिपीडिय like विकिपीडियायाम् विकिपीडियस्य. Other Sanskrit pundits, correct me if I am wrong. - रामप्रियः ०७:२७, २० मेय् २०११ (UTC)
We will have to change some texts also in the फलकम्:मुख्यपृष्ठं - स्वागतम्. Vaibhav Jain ०७:५७, २० मेय् २०११ (UTC)

sa: शिजुएलेक्स वर्येण उपरि वर्णितः स्वसंशयः समीचीनमेव वर्तते। तत्तु विकिपीडिया इत्येव भवितव्यम्।
en: I see there is some doubt in our community whether it should be विकिपीडिया or विकिपीडिय. To me, there is no doubt that it should be विकिपीडिया not विकिपीडिय. Why? Because in any language proper noun is kept intact while translating.
Although Sanskrit has some exceptions in cases where original word is not much Sanskrit-friendly (i.e. word of which easy inflection not be possible), it is then modified to some extent. But instant word is not such one. We can use it as such (विकिपीडिया). But again if we use it in पुल्लिंग there will be some problem in making its शब्दरूप, which would then be like राजन् (राजा). So for making it 'layman-friendly' it is better to use the name in स्त्रीलिंग like बालिका. I mean instead of becoming a great राजा, better to be a बालिका of childly nature, for the sake of new wikipedians :) .Now I present शब्दरूप of विकिपीडिया (स्त्रीलिंग) herewith:
विकिपीडिया विकिपीडिये विकिपीडियाः (Use it when wikipedia is subject, OR even mentioning the name of विकिपीडिया)
विकिपीडियां विकिपीडिये विकिपीडियाः (Use it for "To wikipedia")
विकिपीडियया विकिपीडियाभ्यां विकिपीडियाभिः (By wikipedia)
विकिपीडियायै विकिपीडियाभ्यां विकिपीडियाभ्यः (For wikipedia)
विकिपीडियायाः विकिपीडिभ्यां विकिपीडियाभ्यः (From wikipedia)
विकिपीडियायाः विकिपीडिययोः विकिपीडियानां (Of wikipedia)
विकिपीडियायां विकिपीडिययोः विकिपीडियासु (In wikipedia OR On wikipedia)
हे विकिपीडिये विकिपीडिये विकिपीडियाः ('O My Dear Wikipedia' :) ).
Because of above-said reasons I used this form of the word in the स्वागत template and other basic objects. So please change the logo accordingly. If somebody still has some doubt then please express it. Thanks. - Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १५:०२, ३० जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
I agree with you. Will wait for some days to enable users to comment. Rao7Talk १०:३५, २ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

Dear fellow editors, I have a few suggestions to make:

  • It will be good if we all communicate in Sanskrit onwiki (however ironic may be the fact that I'm typing this out in English), and I think Bhawani Gautam and Shijualex will feel similarly, because they have made similar appeals.
  • We must avoid creation of very short articles, and we must give preference to quality over quantity.

I request editors to comment on this and apply it accordingly to their edits. Rao7Talk ०७:५८, २४ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

Important issues. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ०८:०६, २४ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
I think we'll need more comments than that. Rao7Talk ०८:२४, २४ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
एतत् विषयॆ अहम् मैक्लिन्च् महॊदयस्य समर्थनम् कर्तुम् इच्छामि। सर्वॆ प्रबन्धकाः सम्स्कृतॆ एव सम्भाषणम् कुर्वन्तु। - रामप्रियः १७:३७, २४ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

मुख्यपृष्टॆ प्रमुख चित्रम् इति विभागॆण निर्मूलनम् संपादित करें

प्रिय सहसम्पादकाः मुख्यपृष्टॆ प्रमुख कित्रम् इति एकः विभागः विद्यतॆ। अस्मिन् विभागॆ कॆवलम् एकमॆव चित्रम् प्रदर्श्यतॆ। कॊऽपि विश्लॆषणम् या शीर्षक न विद्यतॆ। एतत् विभागस्य कॊऽपि हॆतु न व्यक्त। एतत् विभाग्गस्य निर्मूलनात् पृष्टॆ अधिक रिक्त लभतॆ। कृपया युष्माकम् मन अत्र लिखन्तु। - रामप्रियः १९:४२, २५ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

En : Dear fellow editors, In main page, there is प्रमुख कित्रम् section, which has only one picture and absolutely no description/title. There is no purpose for this section. Removing this section will give us space on the page. Please express your opinions.

Agree. चित्रानी कामन्स् संग्रहालयात् अस्ति। संस्क्रुत विकिपीडियस्य कोपि संबन्धः नास्ति। Rao7Talk ०९:४५, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

 N Oppose अहम एतद भजते यत् वयं चित्रे सह परिचय लिखामि।

en:I prefer that we should put the introduction of the picture in Sanskrit. It is a automatic template and help us in updating the main page. We should think to replace it when we will get a very active community. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ १४:१४, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

रामप्रियः was appealing for its removal. Anyway, we have to reduce the size of the box and give a proper caption. Rao7Talk १५:११, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

संस्कृतसंबन्धानि चित्राणि एव उपयोजनियानि इति अहं मन्ये। निदर्शनानि:

संस्कृतसाहित्यसंबन्धचित्राणि :

राजा रवि वर्मना रचितम् शकुन्तलायाः चित्रम्

भारतेतिहाससंबन्धानि चित्राणि: इत्यादीनि। Sarpasarpeti101

I agree with Sarpasarpeti101. Rao7Talk १६:३१, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
यदि वयम् चित्र विभागम् रक्षयितुम् निश्चयम् कर्तारः तदा शीर्षिक समेत चित्रम् प्रकाशयितुम् एवम् सम्स्कृतसम्बन्ध चित्रानि प्रकाशयितुम् मम कोऽपि आक्षेपणम् नास्ति। - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १८:०५, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

हलन्तस्य उपयोगः संपादित करें

While writing sanskrit the short a sound is pronounced unless its absence is specifically marked by means of a halanta. I request fellow users to follow this norm. ex The article on nakshatra abhijit was titled अभिजित abhijita rather than अभिजित् abhijit. i think this convention should be followed while writing non sanskrit names to Sarpasarpeti101

एतत् विषयॆ मम सम्पूर्ण सम्मतम् मम स्वाभिप्राय च। एतत् विषयॆ अहम् भवानि गौतम् Adroit सम्पादकयॊः सानिध्यॆ चर्चा कृत अस्मि तत्रतत्र पश्यन्तु। - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १७:३६, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

i think a consensus has to be reached as to the case used in titles of articles and categories. I think the prathama vibhakti or nominative would be the most appropriate. ex. an article on kalidasa should be titled कालिदासः instead of कालिदास। an article on fruits should be titled फलम् instead of फल Sarpasarpeti101

I agree with your proposal. Rao7Talk १६:४६, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
मम समर्थनम् च। परन्तु एकम् उपक्षेप च। कालिदास also should be created and redirected to कालिदासः , it will help in searching for this article. Users need not put the ending ' ः' . - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १७:४६, २६ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

I think we should work on stub articles to make the at least 200 words long and concentrate on quality. We should work on the information provided by old Sanskrit books and the past because people search here to get information. We should have plan & project, routine and work division among active community members. Bureaucrat may decide and make a strategic plan if he wish. But it should be acceptable to all active contributors according to their ability.भवानी गौतम ०२:०१, २७ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

I completely agree with your proposal. Very short articles kill small Wikipedias. We must collaborate and develop articles. Rao7Talk ०४:४०, २७ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
Kills? Too funny! But still I agree with you. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ १५:२१, २९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)
Oh you never know it till it happens to you. Never mind, nothing funny about that. Rao7Talk १९:३७, २९ मेय् २०११ (UTC)

actually i was wondering if thr's some kind of a tool availble to chk what do normally people search for in samskrit wiki most importantly, then we could set our priorities on them. this works fine specially for a team like ours at samskrita bharati...can there be some help on the same? Shubhabangalore (चर्चा) ०५:४०, १८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Well, currently, I don't think there is any such tool. But, I have heard of a similar thing in English Wikipedia (those familiar with WP:DYK would have heard about it). I'll try and find out details about it. Rao7Talk ०९:२६, १८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

चौपालम् इति पदम् सम्स्कृते नास्ति संपादित करें

चौपालम् इति पदस्य एतत् पृष्टशीर्षिके योजितम् अस्ति। परन्तु एतत् शब्दम् मम अभिप्राये सम्स्कृते नास्ति। चौपाल् इति शब्दः हिन्दिभाषायाम् अस्ति सम्स्कृते नास्ति। अतः पृष्टशीर्षिक परिवर्तनम् करणार्थम् मम निवेदनम् समुदायप्रति। नव पृष्टशीर्षिकानि अत्र लिखन्तु।

en:In my opinion(I searched various dictionaries), There is no word called as चौपालम् (which is used in the title of this page) in Sanskrit. There is a word known as चौपाल् in Hindi but I have not come across any such usage in Sanskrit. Hence the title of this page needs to be renamed. Please write your suggestions here. If you think there is indeed such a word in Sanskrit please point to me to the reference. Thanks. - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १६:१८, ८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

I think उदञ्च would be fine. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ १६:४९, ८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
If the rationale behind naming the community page as Village pump is that village pump is place for the community discussions, then why not we name it as ग्रामस्य वटवृक्षतल(under villages banyan tree) would be apt. My reasoning is that in our villages, usual village community discussions (panchayats) happen under a prominent tree either a banyan or peepul tree. As this is a community page, it makes sense to name it thus. - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १७:१५, ८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
Well we have to do what is being one on other wikis. The most near language to Sanskrit is Hindi and they also use Village Pump. I agree from you but we will need to discuss this with other wikipedians.
I checked kannada wikipedia and they use what I have suggested. It means under peepul tree. - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १७:४२, ८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
Yes, its meant to sound as a place where people gather to discuss. Kannada uses "Arali Katte". Note that the new name may not be related to villages or something. Any name having a relevant meaning could be suggested. Rao7Talk १९:५८, ८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
I think विचारस्थल would be best, it will also reflect the extreme vocabulary of the Sanskrit language. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ १०:५३, ९ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

I think विचार मण्डपम् is also good. भवानी गौतम १४:१३, ९ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

मम समर्थनम् I like it. - रामप्रियः सम्भाषणम् १८:०३, ९ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
समर्थनम्. Rao7Talk ०५:३१, १० जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
समर्थनम्♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ०७:५३, १० जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
  Done♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ (चर्चा) १२:५५, १८ जून् २०११ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Members are requested to please comment on this since this issue is important one, being related to the name of the project: विकिपीडिया अथवा विकिपीडिय.
We should decide on this and go ahead accordingly. Thanks. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०९:४१, २० जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

I think that is resolved. There is a general consensus for विकिपीडिय. Regards, ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email १०:२०, २० जूलय् २०११ (UTC)
विकिपीडिया एव व्यवहारयोग्यम् इति भाति । Shubha (चर्चा) १४:१९, २० जूलय् २०११ (UTC)
महोदये, अपि च स्वमतं प्रकाशयतु यद् भवती तत्पदं स्त्रीलिङ्गे सुष्ठु मन्यते उत वा पुल्लिङ्गे? (मम तु मतं उपर्येव वर्तते)। -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १४:४६, २० जूलय् २०११ (UTC)
स्त्रीलिङ्गसदृशम् इति वक्तुं शक्नोमि । पुंलिङ्गवत् तु न । व्यवहारानुकूलाय आकारान्तरूपम् अङ्गीकुर्मः चेत् वरमिति मन्ये । विदुषाम् अङ्गीकारस्य प्राप्तिः तु संशयास्पदमेव । -Shubha (चर्चा) ११:२५, २१ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

Pedia means 'knowledge' संस्कृतॆ विद्या इति। पीडिया can thus be treated as स्त्रीलिङ्ग and also rhyme with विद्या :) I vote for विकिपीडियाSamskritasrini (चर्चा) ०८:५६, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

विदुषाम् अभिप्रायस्य अपेक्षया अस्माकं वाचकानां च उपयॊगित्वं द्रष्टव्यम् इति मम मतम् । संस्कृतविद्वांसः आङ्ग्लपदस्य यॊजनामॆव न अङ्गीकुर्वन्ति । किन्तु विभक्तियॊजनायाः विषयॆ विकिपीडिया एव वरम् । अतः विकिपीडिया इत्यॆव भवेत् ।SumanaKoundinya (चर्चा) ०९:०२, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

You're right Mr. Koudinya, and moreover विकिपीडिया is a "brand name" of our project, besides being a proper noun. Although in Sanskrit, many times we have to compromise with the original word in favor of sanskitization, but here since we are very comfortable with this word, we shouldn't go for विकिपीडिय type of deviations. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०९:३२, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

I will stand for विकिपीडिय still as its easier to use this word. However the points given by some users says it should be विकिपीडिया, an i agree with them, so I will prefer more users commenting. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email १०:०४, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)
After so much consensus achieved on (1) विकिपीडिया (2) स्त्रीलिङ्ग usage of the word विकिपीडिया, I request concerned administrator(s)/bureaucrat to kindly do the needful to reestablish this name. I think the previous logo can be restored to re-change the name, and other places can be edited to reflect the change. Respected editors may refer to forms of word विकिपीडिया given above, at विकिपीडिया अथवा विकिपीडिय, if they have any problem. Thanks. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १०:३४, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)
  •   Done--Seeing that there is a consensus to do so, i am changing विकिपीडिय to विकिपीडिया, but it may take time for the change of logo. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email १२:५५, २२ जूलय् २०११ (UTC)

मुख्यपृष्ठे वार्ता विशेषाङ्कः भूमिकायाः स्थाने संपादित करें

नमस्ते, संस्कृतस्य विकिपीडिया मुख्यपृष्ठे तावत् भूमिकायाः स्थाने दैनिकवार्ताः स्थापयामि इति चिन्तितवान् अस्मि । येन च प्रतिदिनस्य वार्ता संस्कृतेन वयं पठितुं शक्नुमः । अद्यत्वे संस्कृतभाषायाः वार्तापत्रिकाः न सन्ति । अतः यदि संस्कृतस्य विकिपीडिया मुख्यपृष्ठे यदि दैनिकवार्तां योजयामः तर्हि तदाधारेण अद्यतनीनाः विषयाः, नूतनविषयाः च पीडियामध्ये प्राप्तुं शक्नुवन्ति । अद्यत्वे तु केवलं प्राचीनविषयाः एव सन्ति । अतः यदि भवन्तः सर्वेपि सहकुर्वन्तु इति सादरं प्रार्थये । Samvith2011 (चर्चा) ०२:५८, २३ अष्टोबर् २०११ (UTC)

मया पूर्वे एतादृश एकः प्रयासः आरब्ध आसीत्। परमहं अविच्छिन्नतया कर्त्तुं न शक्तवान्। चेद् भवान् एतस्य अविच्छिन्नताऽर्थं सन्नद्धोऽस्ति तदा एतादृश उद्योगः अवश्यमेव कर्त्तव्यः। एतन्नाम स्वागतार्हः अस्ति। -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १५:१४, २३ अष्टोबर् २०११ (UTC)
उत्तमः विचारः । नैरन्तर्येण कर्तुं यदि शक्नुमः तर्हि सफलता तु सुनिश्चिता एव । प्रयतताम् । शम् । शुभा (चर्चा) ०५:२५, २५ अष्टोबर् २०११ (UTC)

Dear all,

I greatly appreciate all of your efforts in reviving news section on the main page. But if you'd notice, I did some edits today, and in connection with that, I'd like to mention a few core principles.

  • Remove external links on the main page. (We don't want our visitors to go away to some other site as soon as they land here ;) )
  • Stay neutral and verifiable. Our primary aim is not to report news; our aim is to make sure that visitors read our articles on recent events. Now, we don't want unverified information on the main page, because we will receive a lot of criticism for that.

In that light, I would like to propose a few guidelines.

  • Each line in the news entered must have at least one valid wikilink (a blue link) to an existing article.
  • The wikilinked article should be updated with the recent news, along with (most importantly) a reference from a reliable news source (prominent news channels, newspapers).

I don't seek to make the process too complicated (like on enwiki), but this is just to maintain some verifiability.

Please state your comments below. Rao7Talk ०६:१०, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Mr. Chidroop has been doing good job in news section. I welcome the preceding suggestions by Mr. Mike and in fact I was having similar sentiments abt news section. My comments go pointwise below:
  • External link removal is very much required.
  • Neutrality and Verifiability must be there. We must ensure that no POV is there as a news-item. And verifiability is something which adds to quality of our work so whoever adds some news must ensure that it is from a reliable source and presented in a tone which is neutral.
  • Having one wikilink at least, per news item, is welcome, but finally it depends upon whether that day one has enough time to make such article or not (because even on Hindi wiki sometimes it becomes difficult, and we have less active users then hiwiki). We can not omit an important news simply because we didn't have related article; though we must try our best for having core articles related to news items. And also ensure that in absence of article also, the news sentence is complete and reliable.
  • Wikiliinked article must be updated: no doubt in this.
I hope we will be able to improve in these aspects. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०७:००, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Thanks Hemant, appreciate your points. Yes, I agree its difficult to create an article suddenly, but I suggest creating a stub, if nothing else. This is because we need a reliable news source as a reference, and if we don't have an article, we won't have a place to insert the reference. So, I feel that verifiability is top preference. If we don't get a means to give a reference to a reliable news source, then we don't put it. What say? Rao7Talk ०७:४८, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

I still have doubt in using such compulsion, because even English wiki sometimes gives link to article which has merely tangential mention of the news. Suppose the news is related to space-walk by an astronaut from a spacecraft Y, then any experienced contributor can add this news to main page but to make an article of spacecraft Y, to such a detail that related spacewalks are also mentioned, will certainly require a technically aware writer. English wiki, having large reach, always has enough writers who are sufficiently exposed to any given topic. But here if we impose such policy, some of important news will never enter into the news section because of lack of a qualified article-writer. That said, having an article on each current affair topic is always a welcome improvement. I think we can make this as a guideline but not a compulsory rule. Let us start it as a lax rule and then if successful we can make it compulsory (i.e. having at least one article which gives a reference to the news). Perhaps we can provide reference to one-liner news on the Sanskrit wikinews page (exists as सद्यः कालीन सम्भवाः on this wiki, and is unused nowadays)-Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १३:०१, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC).

I don't mind not having an article. Its the news source I'm worried about. We should not post anything without having a clear news source. How about this: If it is possible to create an article, then the news reference should go there. If creating the article is complex, then the news source should compulsorily be posted on the talk page of the News template, in order for anyone else to verify the material. Rao7Talk १३:२३, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
I don't prefer wikinews as a source, again because its a public wiki, and hence not really reliable. Rao7Talk १३:२५, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
That's good (to post reference on the talk page of the news template). That will make the news compulsorily verifiable without enforcing need for an article. I didn't say that wikinews should be used as the reference, rather I was suggesting that the news' source can be put on such a separate page. Anyway that is sorted out now. I request my fellow Sanskrit wikipedians to adopt this rule/ or suggest their valuable view in this regard if they differ. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १६:४९, ७ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Also, looking at today's section, I think we should not post festivals and such things, unless they are noted for some other different news. We could probably have another section for this, something like: "On this day" on enwp, where we list festivals and important days? Rao7Talk १३:२५, ८ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Closing संपादित करें

Since I see no opposition to this discussion, I am now closing this discussion, the result being that the following guidelines are in force with regards to the News section on the Main page:

Rao7Talk १५:०२, ११ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

As you all know our main page is a little outdated and we need a new layout. I made some changes, which are at योजकः:Vibhijain/main. Please give your opinions and suggestions. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email १५:५५, २१ नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Dear contributors, I got the following message from User:Viswaprabha regarding categories. He asked me to share it with all of you:

Dear Sir, Although I had been long wishing to get involved in Sa.wikipedia.org (and other siblings), it is only now I was able to spare some dedicated time. As I went through the portal, I find there is an urgent need to regularize and refine categorizations.

As a person familiar with this task (in other language wiki portals), I feel that I could be of much help if I get involved in this job.

I am not aware if there has been some serious discussions at the sa.wiki in this regard. If so, please take me to the corresponding link.

In the meanwhile, I would like to suggest that the following points be noted while categorizing.

Ideally, every page in a wikipedia should belong to at least one category.
Every category should be within a tree structure that ultimately stems into one single top level.
Category names should be in general, plurals. (eg: vEdaH v/s vEdaaH or adhyaayaH v/s adhyaayaaH )
When numbered titles appear a leading zero to single digit numbers would help in showing up the entire list in good order, automatically sorted in tact.)
Every page should have only the necessary but sufficient types of categories. (eg: a sloka in karmayOga may belong to category: Karmayoga. Since Karmayoga already belongs to Category: Bhagavad Gita, the sloka need not be added to Category:Bhagavad Gita (or its higher level categories again.)
In general, if there are more than 30 or 40 items in a category, there is something odd about it. There is scope for further categorization in such cases. (Except in certain cases (eg. last chapter of Gita with 78 slokas.)

This and other related points may be communicated to other sa.wiki contributors as well. Thank you.

Viswaprabha (चर्चा) ११:१५, ३० नवम्बर् २०११ (UTC)


Rao7Talk ०९:२२, ९ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

संपादित करें

मतविभाजनम् (अस्याः चर्चायाः अन्तिमा स्थितिः):

विश्वकोशः- Abhirama, Hemant wikikosh, Shubha (As a rep. of Sanakrit Bharati), श्रीगीर्वाणी
सर्वविज्ञानकोशः- Shri Naveen Shankar,
विश्वज्ञानकोशः- Shri Guruguhadasa
New logo
In the size which would be displayed.

Dear contributors, User:Sbblr0803 has graciously done the change in the logo of Samskrit Wikipedia. The new logo is as shown in your right. The primary difference is the change from विकिपीडिय to विकिपीडिया. Now, I would like your comments on this, by means of a Support/Oppose discussion. Kindly indicate your opinion. Once we get a consensus, I can file a bug, and the logo will be changed in a matter of days. Thank you. Rao7Talk १८:३८, २० दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Hello Mike, graphically this logo is OK. But here स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः is used instead of स्वतन्त्र-विश्वविज्ञानकोशः (the current). Though both are grammatically OK, but still I think before changing this we must discuss and have consensus on this single point, i.e. what phrase to be used in place of "the free encyclopedia". So I think we should suspend voting for a while, and hopefully it wouldn't take long to have a consensus, then we can vote. Members can take reference of previous discussion on this point from विचारमण्डपम् also while deciding our view. What do you say? -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०४:२६, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Very well, let's have a discussion, and if there are no serious concerns with the wording, we'll take it forward. Rao7Talk ०४:३४, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Discussion संपादित करें

Here are a few points which may help consider the logo:

  • Although, विश्वविज्ञानकोशः is a defining word, but it is long and so not better than विश्वकोशः.
  • In Hindi विश्वकोश and ज्ञानकोश both are used for word encyclopedia. But विश्वकोश is more catchy even there. Psychological reason could be the ओजगुण of the word विश्वकोश. Hindi wikipedians while talking of an 'encyclopedia' are tempted to use 'विश्वकोश' despite their subtitle being 'ज्ञानकोश', and for 'encyclopedic' they use विश्वकोशीय and never ज्ञानकोशीय.
  • विश्व means 'all' in Sanskrit, and it is treated like a pronoun (perhaps influenced from the status of word सर्व). It also means the world, with the same line of reasoning. And it is many times used to form compounds, e.g. in विश्वनाथः, विश्वाधारम् etc.
  • The Apte dictionary meaning of विश्व can be consulted here.
  • कोश has been used to refer to works of inclusive nature from ancient time.

-Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०६:२५, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

The word "विश्वविज्ञान" present earlier in the logo would sound like only world's science/scientific कोशः, which was the main reason to omit विज्ञान from the previous logo, since Wikipedia is not just about science, rather it contains everything that this world has and thrives on. Abhirama (चर्चा) ०७:२०, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
While we are at this particular topic, let me also indicate a case for the Wikipedia to be transliterated as विक्किपीडिया. Some Indic Wikipedias (eg. Malayalam, Tamil, Odisha) are already using क्कि instead of कि as it sounds closer to the way the word is pronunced. Sanskrit being more a language of phenetics than that of script, my humble opinion is to consider whether we should change the present कि to क्कि.
As for the other propositions, I feel that they are quite agreeable and semantically more befetting. Viswaprabha (चर्चा) ०८:५०, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Hello Viswa, regarding ur point i will try to make some clarity. There is a particular reason why some indic langs use विक्कि instead of विकि to transliterate विकि (and actually that reason is not applicable to Sanskrit). This is more so in south indian languages. Reason being that the old dravidian languages (and today's tamil) did not have separate sounds for क and ग (in fact all four letters of varga क ख ग घ are represented with க) and similar is the case of च छ ज झ and so on. Moreover, in Tamil the letter க (letter for क) also gives sound of ह, particularly when used in middle of word. Now, whenever there is a pressing need to use क in the middle, to avoid confusion with ह and ग, we use double क्क in tamil. This although changes the sound but saves us from altogether different sound of ह. This doubling forces the speaker to use क not ह, because in Tamil, there is a rule that if "first letter of varga" is doubled, it should be pronounced as first, and not as third etc. Similar rule is there for च,ट,त,प etc. which, if used in middle, are used as च्च, ट्ट, त्त,प्प, to avoid confusion with their other pronunciations viz. स,ड,द and ब respectively. That's why computer (कम्प्यूटर) is written as கம்ப்யூட்டர் (कम्प्यूट्टर्) (note the doubling of ट) otherwise it would be pronounced as कम्प्यूडर्.
In Sanskrit, since this rule set is different (we have separate letters for all four sounds and one-to-one mapping between letters and sounds), there is no need to transliterate wiki to विक्कि. (In Tamil, if written as விகிப்பீடியா, i.e. with single क, most of people will pronounce it as विहिपीडिया). Thanks.-Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०९:२९, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

A new logo for consideration संपादित करें

I am adding one logo - that I have created from my side for consideration.

समीक्षार्थं समर्पितं नूतनं चित्रम्
समीक्षार्थं समर्पितं नूतनं चित्रम् १५०px

(It is presently in png format - but I hope it can be converted to svg).

Please consider the following facts

  1. विश्व = सर्व = अखिल = समस्त = all
  2. As far as I know, in Sanskrit, the word विज्ञान does not stand for Science. I agree the fact that in all the languages like Hindi, Marathi, Gujarati, etc, this term is used as a translation for Science. But in Sanskrit it means only 'Konwledge' (more exactly 'special knowledge' - i.e. not all kind of knowldge, but has some importance) विशिष्टं ज्ञानं इति. Similarly the term वैज्ञानिक also does not mean Scientist. It refers only to a wise person, or a learned person.
  3. कोश in masculine form / in feminine form means a 'cell' or pocket or some compartment which can be used for collection. That is,कोश here refers to a collection.
  • Hence, to imply the meaning that this is a collection of all knowledge, all the three words are required. If we use विश्वकोश only, it will not give the exact meaning - it will mean only 'a collection of all' only. And, in the logo proposed by me, I used सर्व instead of विश्व, because विश्व also refers to the world/universe. To avoid the double meaning, I chose सर्व.
  • I used a little more bold fonts to be more catching and to have a traditional look. The lean fonts that used in the existing logo and the proposed logo by User:Sbblr0803 looks somewhat modern (See the double danda - this looks like pipe symbol in both). I prefer the traditional look.
    • विश्व = सर्व = अखिल = समस्त = all
    • विज्ञान = विशिष्टं ज्ञानं = knowledge (which is important)
    • कोश = cell (a pocket/chamber for collection)
  • Due to the above reasons I prefer सर्वविज्ञानकोशः/अखिलविज्ञानकोशः to mere विश्वकोशः/ज्ञानकोशः even though it is somewhat long.
  • The true spirit of the word 'encyclopaedia' is included in सर्वविज्ञानकोशः
  • And now regarding the Khara, Atikhara, Mridu, Ghosha and Anunasika varnas in Dravidian/South Indian languages. Hemant pointed out only the case of Tamil. This is not true with other Dravidian languages. See क ख ग घ ङ in Kannada ಕ ಖ ಗ ಘ ಙ, in Telugu క ఖ గ ఘ ఙ and in Malayalam ക ഖ ഗ ഘ ങ. In all the three languages, all the scripts in Sanskrit are there; even more scripts than that in Sanskrit. It is true that, in Tamil, only the Kharas and Anunasikas are there. But it is particular to Tamil only. The reason given by Hemant for doubling of ट in the Tamil transliteration of the word Computer is correct. But, the reason given for doubling of क in विक्किपीडिया is not correct. While pronouncing Dravidian languages, people usually lighten Kharas when they follow some other Varna. Due to this, in Dravidian languages, Kharas are used in doubled form for correct pronunciation. But, when we use Sanskrit (particularly, when it is used in Devanagari script) this doubling is not required. विकिपीडिया is correct in Sanskrit. There is no need to double क --नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) १४:५६, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Thank you, both of you, Hemant and Naveen for your enlightening reminder about why we need not double the क् in Wikipedia.

I would agree with Naveen in his justifications for the new phrase स्वतन्त्रसर्वविज्ञानकोशः . Even if the longer appearance of this word is no strange to a language like Sanskrit for it is one of the rarest language models of complexity synthesised from simplest building models. In addition, it is a single word substituting several words in rather too analytic languages.

The translation of 'Science' into 'vigyAn' in hindi etc. may look very awkward to a person from (at least) Malayalam speaking community. We use 'shAstram' (शास्त्रः) as a direct and bilaterally reversible translation for Science. विज्ञानम् is a word that means (any kind of) specialised (विशिष्टं ) Knowledge (ज्ञानं) in Malayalam.

The morphology of these words would imply Naveen's suggestions as more appropriate. Viswaprabha (चर्चा) २३:५३, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

It really doesn't matter whether final logo is designed by Mr. Naveen or Mr. Abhiram (or any other community member), because each of them has a single objective, to make the Sanskrit wiki look better. But we have to discuss about features of the logo and their desirability and suitability here. Regarding look of the letters and double danda chihna, i think style followed by Naveen is OK. But regarding सर्वविज्ञानकोशः for encyclopedia, i still think that विश्वकोशः is fine. There is no doubt that word सर्वविज्ञानकोशः represents the meaning of encyclopedia, i have already expressed this view with the word विश्वविज्ञानकोशः also. But reason for using विश्वकोशः is different. It is the brevity and openness of the word. Only thing which could hinder us from using it could be its grammatical incorrectness or contention with traditional usages. But i see even that is not present in this case. विश्व alone has many times been used to refer to a "all As" where A is a category of objects, and A is actually omitted in resultant word. e.g. in Apte's dictionary word विश्वभेषजं means universal remedy. Here it is not used as विश्वव्याधिभेषजम्, or विश्वरोगभेषजम्. Similarly in अयं मे हस्तो भगवान् अयं में भगवत्तरः। अयं मे विश्वभेषजो...., etc., (this shloka is spoken at morning looking at palms of hand) we see that the hand is mentioned as remedy of all diseases (not "remedy of all people"), but still used विश्वभेषजो, and the meaning of व्याधि (disease) is inherent.
Similarly referring to this article on Hindi wiki, it is evident that विश्व has been used for a book having wider range (though that was not an encyclopedia, but still नानार्थकोशः)- the name is विश्वप्रकाश, and this is the mention of it-
बारहवीं शती के पूर्वार्ध में धनंजय नामक जैन कवि ने नाममाला और महेश्वर कवि ने विश्वप्रकाश नामक कोश प्रस्तुत किए। विश्वप्रकाश नानार्थ कोश है।
Translation- in early 12th centuary, Naamamaalaa was written by Jain poet Dhananjaya and विश्वप्रकाश by Maheshwara Kavi. Vishwaprakaasha is a नानार्थकोश.
Now that, the validity of using विश्व alone, dropping the विशेष्य (so to speak), is attested by tradition, so Naveen ji, in my opinion we should use विश्वकोशः in interest of ease of Sanskrit. Because our aim is to make Sanskrit popular in common people, without hindering its rule, which is satisfied here. Please consider the fact that this word once used will become a standard and we will have to use it very frequently, why not to offer a simpler form of Sanskrit to the users, as far as we can.
I would advise that we can club the ideas of the two logos (font, style etc. from Naveen's and wording from Abhiram's), and come to a perferct logo. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०६:२०, २२ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Dear all, I, as a representative of Samskrita Bharati would like to say this - we completely agree with what Hemant has said above. We also insist the use of the word स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः as the word we choose should be meaningful, simpler and brief. (योगात् रूढिः बलीयसी यथा पङ्कजशब्दवत् इति शास्त्रोक्तिः । 'पङ्कज'इत्यनेन यद्यपि पङ्के जातं यत्किमपि भवितुम् अर्हति तथापि तस्य श्रवणात् 'कमलं' स्मर्यते सर्वैः । तथैव 'विज्ञान'शब्दस्य श्रवणमात्रेण अखिलस्य ज्ञानस्य कल्पना न भवति ।) Regarding logo also let us club as mentioned above and come to a perfect logo. Thanks. शुभा (चर्चा) ०७:०१, २२ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Dear Hemant, Subha and all, I tried to explain in all possible ways why सर्वविज्ञानकोशः is preferred to विश्वकोशः. I have explained word-by-word. I agree the term सर्वविज्ञानकोशः is somewhat long but, long terms are not unfamiliar to Sanskrit. See - वेषभूषाशानोपासनापद्धतिक्रीडनामोदसंस्कारवृत्तादिषु - Such long combinations are possible in Sanskrit. This may not be possible in other Indian languages. But this समासवृत्तिः is the beauty of Sanskrit. Sanskrit need not be made identical to Hindi/Kannada/Malayalam or other Indian Languages. Sanskrit has its own identity. And if it is that much necessary to use shorter term, I still think विश्वकोशः is not OK. विज्ञानकोशः or ज्ञानकोशः is more appropriate than विश्वकोशः. Once again I wish to draw your attention to the varied meaning of विश्व - it has meaning of 'universe' as well as 'all'. कोशः means to a Cell. Can you please exlpain विग्रहवाक्यम् of the term विश्वकोशः. सर्वविज्ञानकोशः means सर्वविज्ञानां कोशः, a collection of all knowledge (knowledge which has some importance). सर्व for all, विज्ञान for knowledge, कोशः for collection. I hope the popularity of term विश्वकोष in Hindi may not become an obstacle to Sanskrit. (See, the word दैवम् is used for 'God' in Malayalam, but the meaning of the word दैवम् is different in Sanskrit. The रूढार्थम् of a word in other languages like Hindi/Kannada/Malayalam/Telugu/Bengali/Gujarati etc. need not be similar with its actual meaning in Sanskrit.)--नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) १५:५९, २२ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
(Sorry for this long answer, but it was needed for some further clarity.)
Dear Naveen and all members,
In previous messages, I have given reasons all pertaining to Sanskrit, and so there is no question of Hindi popularity becoming a hurdle, I have never taken reference to rules of Hindi grammar or Hindi works while giving the पदसिद्धि.
Though I have already told how the legitimacy of the word विश्वकोश is proved in Sanskrit, but since you have again raised doubt I will give some more reasons.
विग्रहवाक्यम् of विश्वकोश is: विश्वस्य, सर्वस्य कोशः इति विश्वकोशः। (1)
Now what your contention is, विश्व alone cannot represent सर्वं ज्ञानम्, rather it is incomplete. And I have taken up doubt in my previous message itself (in fact i am myself of skeptic nature while judging any such word’s validity). But here is another example- Apte’s Sanskrit to Hindi dictionary gives विश्वंकर = आँख (eye)। And पदसिद्धि given in the dictionary is as under:
विश्वं सर्वं करोति प्रकाशयति इति।
This is very fit example. Here instead of using विश्ववस्तुकरः or विश्वजनंकरः it is simply विश्वंकरः, and also विश्व is not used in sense of universe either, as is clear from the विग्रहवाक्यम् provided in the dictionary (सर्वम् is given as meaning here). So "one which lightens all" is used as विग्रहवाक्यम् to acutally imply "one which lightens all things" or "one which lightens all visible things" (it is well-known that eye does not lighten 'all', e.g.- thoughts, gods, and abstract things).
Now i will project some more doubts.
Here विश्वस्य कोशः or सर्वस्य कोशः could mean that it is collection of all the things physically. The solution follows: This doubt may come only when कोशः is taken as treasure. But if we take the relevant meaning of कोशः here, i.e. a book with collection of words or information, the doubt goes. कोश itself means a book which enumerates something (for example see विश्वप्रकाशः here last shloka is: कोषं विश्वप्रकाशाख्यं निरमाच्छ्रीमहेश्वरः।।,he has not used शब्दकोषं विश्वप्रकाशाख्यं, this means कोष has complete meaning). And after taking this meaning of कोश there is no confusion of it being a physical collection of 'all'. Now question arises, to what does this कोश pertain? It is evidently विश्व or सर्व (all) to which it pertains.
More parallels can be drawn in this sense. e.g. Hinduism has धर्मसूत्र s. This generic name (there are several dharmasutras) gives an exact parallel to word विश्वकोश. Here सूत्रम् means aphorism (or collection of them). What does धर्मसूत्रम् mean. धर्मस्य सूत्रम् or धर्ममधिकृत्य सूत्रम्, or similar. Whatever it be, but it is clear that subject of a book can be used as first part of compound, the second part being the generic typename of book.
and remember, here विश्व means सर्व.
So if we infer a similar meaning, from the above said विग्रहवाक्यम् (1), we can say that विश्वकोशः is विश्वमधिकृत्य कोशः or सर्वमधिकृत्य कोशः।
And as a last projected doubt, one can say that, word is invalid because it is not used by ancient authors, and is ‘invented’. Then i must say that we have still to improve in terms of becoming liberal. Panini gave the best system of deriving new words to us, and our ancient authors used it to their fullest extent. There is a great amount of flexibility in our ancient system of grammar, as can be seen by लालित्य of our ancient books. Sanskrit never restricts us to introduce new format of words, only it guides us so that those new formats can be understood by readers using certain rules.
(Kindly don’t take anything in this message personally, only for sake of clarity i make my sentences freely.Thanks.)
For another example please see here http://www.archive.org/stream/practicalsanskri00apteuoft#page/972/mode/2up in meaning of सर्व one word is सर्वाधिकारिन्, सर्वाध्यक्षः - meaning a general superintendent. Here it is name of a post (designation). The person is verily not सर्वस्य अधिकारिन् or सर्वस्य अध्यक्षः he is only सर्वेषां विभागानां अध्यक्षः or at the most सर्वस्य प्रशासनस्य अध्यक्षः, etc. But you see that, word सर्व giving the meaning of broadness, is left without विशेष्य, and the विग्रह remains सर्वस्य अधिकारिन् while विशेष्य is implicit.
Furhter, you can see in Moniour Williams dictionary here http://www.archive.org/stream/1872sanskriten00moniuoft#page/944/mode/2up (in second column of left-hand-side page, in upper lines), that विश्वकोश is already used as name of a kosha, the aforesaid विश्वप्रकाशः by महेश्वरसूरि, and this is an ancient work.
I hope you would consider these references as these are all reputed works. With all regards. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०७:१९, २३ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Dear Hemant and all, what I was trying to point out was that the विग्रहवाक्यम् of विश्वकोश i.e विश्वस्य कोशः can come up with two different meaning. In order to avoid this, still I prefer सर्वविज्ञानकोशः or shorter विज्ञानकोशः to विश्वकोशः. I request you all to consider the term सर्वविज्ञानकोशः, if it has no other problem exept its length. Please stand for perfection, both in meaning and grammar. With this final comments, I am leaving this discussion for its fate.--नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) १४:४९, २३ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Support संपादित करें

  1.   समर्थनम् 'विश्वकोशः' इत्येव सुन्दरम् अर्थपूर्णञ्च अस्ति । एवमेव भवतु इति मम अभिप्रायः । सज्जीकृतं Logo समीचीनमस्ति । धन्यवादः । शुभा (चर्चा) ०७:२४, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
  2.   समर्थनम् Yes this is necessary as the old logo incorrectly displays the name as "विकिपेडिय" in place of the correct name "विकिपेडिया"०७:३१, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
  3.   समर्थनम् "विकिपीडिया - स्वतन्त्र विश्वञानकॊष: " इति शुद्धम् एवं समीचिनं भवति । Vignyaana means scientific knowledge while gnyaana means knowledge ( of all kinds ) and sugyaana means wisdom. Wisdom is the practical implementation aspect of knowledge, i.e. in other words, knowing how to use the knowledge is called wisdom. The spirit of the word 'encyclopaedia' must be taken instead of the literal meaning and translation. The original intention of the word is to express that the book encompasses everything about this world or universe, i.e. it is supposed to be a know-all, ready-reckoner for general knowledge, somewhat like 'omniscient' which is the term used for God who is 'Omnipotent, Omnipresent & Omniscient'. Since ancient times, the most learned & practical person in a society was referred to as ' vishwagnyaani ' or 'world-wise'. Other terms used for specifically addressing a person w.r.t. his specialisation of learning were - sarvagnya, tatvagnyaani, lokagnyaani, dharmagnyaani, vistrutagnyaani, etc.. Hence " Vishvagnyaanakosha: " is the correct term and catch phrase for Wikipedia in Samskritam Guruguhadasa (चर्चा)
  4.   समर्थनम् अर्धमात्रालाघवं पुत्रोत्सवं मन्यते वैयाकरणः । इति उक्तिः अस्ति । संस्कृतभाषायां अर्थभेदेन विना सांक्षेपं कर्तुं ”वृत्तयः” सन्ति । यदि सर्वे अंशाः 'विश्वकोशः' इत्येन पदेन शक्यते किमर्थं विस्तारः । एतत् स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः इति पदमेव पर्याप्तं सुन्दरम् अर्थपूर्णञ्च अस्ति । एतदेव अङ्गीकुर्मः इत्यपि प्रार्थना । Logo अनुरूपम् अस्ति । प्रणामः । श्रीगीर्वाणी (चर्चा) ०४:४७, २२ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC) (चर्चा) ०७:२४, २१ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Now I'm getting confused, what are all these "support"s for? The Logo designed by User:Sbblr0803 or the one by Naveen Sankar? Please remember, I have to go to bugzilla with only one logo in hand :) (For the record, I have no preference, either would fit the bill fine for me). Rao7Talk १५:३६, २२ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
  1.   समर्थनम् अत्र अस्मिन् विषये बहुधा चर्चाः दृष्टाः, मम अभिप्रायस्तु विश्वकोशः इत्येव भवतु । यतः ज्ञानं विज्ञानसहितमेव भवति सर्वदा । विज्ञानशब्दस्य पुनर्निर्देशः मास्तु । विश्वकोशः इत्येव वरम् इति मदीयोऽयम् अभिप्रायः ।Samvith2011 (चर्चा) ०७:१८, २१ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)
  2.   समर्थनम् विश्वकोशः इत्येव भवतु इति मम अपि अभिप्रायः ।Keshav Melnad ०७:२७, २१ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)
  3.   समर्थनम् विश्वकोशः इत्येव भवतु इति मम अपि अभिप्रायः | Sandeep V Kulkarni (चर्चा) ०७:३९, २१ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)
  4.   समर्थनम् I believe we have taken quite a lot of time on this decision. In my opinion, विश्वकोशः is simple and good. Kindly come to a conclusion and give us good logo at the earliest, please.SumanaKoundinya (चर्चा) ०७:४८, २१ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)
  5.   समर्थनम् Encyclopedia इत्यस्य विश्वकोशः इति शब्दः व्यापकतया अङ्गीकृतः अस्ति । अतः तस्य स्थाने अन्यस्य शब्दस्य अन्वेषणं नावश्यकम् इति मम मतिः । Pankaja Rajagopal (चर्चा) ०९:२३, २१ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)

Oppose संपादित करें

  1.   विरोधः The very name of the encyclopaedia, that is going to be the most important word in this portal, needs to be correctly refined, discussed and vetted with more consensus. The explanations given are still not convincing to me. I request more expert opinions and suggestions are sought from learnt people from different corners of land and then decide the final word on this. A delay is not pressing. On the other hand, a fast but wrong decision can be evevn irreversible later.

I did not notice/understand that there is a voting on this. Or on what particular exact notion, we are voting. So if it was for the approval of a particular logo, then I have to oppose! Sorry! It has again nothing personal, even nothing against the words but about their usage, semantics and compounding.

I would have liked to participate in this discussion more actively, but unfortunately, I am overseas on an indefinite but short trip. So please allow sufficient time, before closures and vetting conclusions. Viswaprabha (चर्चा) ०८:४४, २४ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Dear Viswa, Merely saying that this is not convincing to me, is not the kind of opposition endorsed by Wikipedia. I am seeing that from the beginning only I am providing explanations at length with grammatical rules and all references from ancient works.
Dear friend, Nobody has hindered you to put your points with facts and references and let those points be examined by all. For now, if you read the comments in support section, rather than votes, you will know who all have supported for this. Note that the original logo with word विश्वकोश was not presented by me. In fact it was me, the closer of this discussion, who actually 'forced' that there should be a discussion on the validity of word विश्वकोश. My words:
Hello Mike, graphically this logo is OK. But here स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः is used instead of स्वतन्त्र-विश्वविज्ञानकोशः (the current). Though both are grammatically OK, but still I think before changing this we must discuss and have consensus on this single point
And your fear that later we cannot change the name is not justified. We can always change if there is a well-founded reason and consensus, later on.
This topic can be discussed for any modification in a separate new section for the purpose at any time, if anybody wants; and logo will be changed if aforesaid conditions are satisfied. This is all which should satisfy the concern raised by you, and this is democratic and rational enough. This is last comment from my side in this section. Regards. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ११:४५, २४ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Closing संपादित करें

Dear Naveen, I have all respect for your suggestions. And your work for logo is commendable. We will have to pass several times through such discussions in interest of Sanskrit wiki, every discussion setting a different scene of ayes and nos. But regarding this single word "encyclopedia" the consensus is going for विश्वकोशः (as is seen from the supporting comments below). So I would request for using the first logo for sa wikipedia. If Mr. Abhirama can change it as per suggestions (making round letters, bolder 'विकिपीडिया', and as Naveen said, correctly shaped danda-chihnas), then it can be filed on bugzilla Please add the new logo in fresh section as i am closing this discussion, which was on the subtitle issue. For revised logo simple 'yes'/'no'/one-liner-comment will be sufficient. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १८:२७, २३ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

I am highly disappointed. An inappropriate word is going to be standard. I expected positive comments at least from Ms.Shubha. But, nothing happened. Anyway, before implementing the new logo, please verify the aspect ratio (Please don't upload the elongated logo) Please make a close look on Sri.Abhirama's logo - some round/circular patches are visible throughout. Kindly make it lashes/patches free, at least. Thank you all---नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) ०३:४७, २४ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Vehemently oppose

Hemant ! I have reason to think that my lines may not have drawn anyone's attention in the midst of the heat generated by Naveen's discussion. I certainly oppose the phrase vishwakosha: ! It should be vishwagyaanakosha: . What is an encyclopaedia without knowledge ? Vishwakosha: just means some kind of "world treasure house". What kind of treasure is it ? It is a treasure house of knowledge and information. I have already explained that gyaana is knowledge, sugyaana is wisdom, pragyaana is skill & talent, vigyaana is science and I need not say what is agyaana !

So the catch phrase should definitely be swatantra vishwagyaanakosha: !!

-गुरुगुहदास: (चर्चा)

संपादित करें

As i said the first logo still needs some modifications, and with regard to this comment by Shri Naveen:
before implementing the new logo, please verify the aspect ratio (Please don't upload the elongated logo) Please make a close look on Sri.Abhirama's logo - some round/circular patches are visible throughout. Kindly make it lashes/patches free, at least.
I fully agree with you. Problem of patches was noticed by me too, which i thought was my local issue; good that it is caught timely. We shall move forward only after having these problems sorted out. If Mr. Naveen finds it appropriate he can take the work forward, or else we'll (have to) wait. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०७:२६, २४ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Those golf ball like patches don't show up on the actual file; it shows up somehow when I upload it to the wiki. I think that should be a non-issue. Rao7Talk ०३:४३, २६ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)
Aspect ratio will be standard, the dimensions will be 135x155 px, which is what the guys at bugzilla want. I currently have the .png version, but will be grateful if anyone can come up with a .svg version. Rao7Talk ०३:४६, २६ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Review requests for logo discussion संपादित करें

Hemant ! I have reason to think that my lines may not have drawn anyone's attention in the midst of the heat generated by Naveen's discussion. I certainly oppose the phrase vishwakosha: ! It should be vishwagyaanakosha: . What is an encyclopaedia without knowledge ? Vishwakosha: just means some kind of "world treasure house". What kind of treasure is it ? It is a treasure house of knowledge and information. I have already explained that gyaana is knowledge, sugyaana is wisdom, pragyaana is skill & talent, vigyaana is science and I need not say what is agyaana !

So the catch phrase should definitely be swatantra vishwagyaanakosha: !!

-Guruguhadasa (चर्चा)

Haven't i answered this doubt with literary evidence in one of my 'projected' doubts above? -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०५:१९, २९ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

From your so-called "evidence" it is even more evident that my contention is in the right direction. I never intended to take kosha: as just physical collection. It is actually a "store" . In this case the store is a book. This book , in the true spirit and sense of the word encyclopaedia, is a repository of knowledge and is intended to be a "know-all and or ready reckoner". Knowledge is always available and STORED only either in the minds of the people or in the books & other written records they generate. So your evidence ACTUALLY supports my reasoning ( for vishwagyaanakosha: ) more than your argument ( for vishwakosha: ) which reasons that it should mean a world-book. I reiterate that since very ancient times, by definition, a learned person or scholar was called a " pundit or vidwaan " while a wise & experienced person was called a "Lokagyaani, Vishwagyaani or Sarvagnya". A pundit is book-wise ( all his gyaana is in the book and from the book ) while the experienced & practical person is worldly-wise as he knows the ways of the world ( his wisdom stems from his experience which is apart from and also in using the bookish knowledge practically & convincing power ). Hence I sincerely feel with conviction that your reasoning is not commensurate with our objectives and requirements. जयतु विश्वञानकॊश: .

-Guruguhadasa (चर्चा)

जयतु विश्वञानकॊश:? I think you are continuously using wrong word. It is not विश्वञानकॊश:, you should fight for विश्वज्ञानकोशः, if u ever want so, because the word for knowledge in Sanskrit is ज्ञान not ञान. Neither ur usage of word is correct, nor i am able to understand what reasoning is there in ur above message, if at all. And pardon me, i cannot continuously answer (and correct) every such review requests, where the very word suggested is blatantly wrong (previously u wrote it in support section with word- समर्थनम्, when u were actually suggesting a 'new word', which was neither in Naveen's version nor Abhiram's(Sbblr0803) one; while there was no reason for confusion until that time). Thanks. -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १७:००, २९ दशम्बर् २०११ (UTC)

Hemant ! I know & accept your correction. The letter for ज्ञा ( now copied from your text ) is not available in the soft keyboard I am using at present and it was oversight on my part to leave it as such. But it was written in all sincerity and conviction . I don't intend to confuse anyone. Since I was not familiar how to ( and did not know if I could ) write a new paragraph I wrote in the samarthanam, wherein, I supported your view on the removal of vigyaana while reiterating that gyaana alone was sufficient. No need to get worked up. I also suggest that, if it can be done, the devanagari letter "vi" lying aside, be put in front instead of the chinese ( or japanese ?) kanji letter. -Guruguhadasa (चर्चा)

स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः vs स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः संपादित करें

Due to prolonged discussion on term for 'encyclopedia', I couldn't find chance to place my another doubt, which I am putting now. It is related to selection between स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः and स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः.
I prefer using स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः, and I have sought some expert opinion on this, according to which, the term is grammatically correct, but स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः should be used because it is easier. Though I have not got addressal of my doubts; and so I am writing them here. This is just to put my doubts on-record, so that, if in future somebody has got a convincing reply to them, he/she may write hereafter.
As I said, since I don't have support for my version so I am deferring to expert opinion, i.e. स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः.

In my opinion स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः is preferable because of following reasons:

I see here we are misusing the capacity of समास of Sanskrit by compounding those parts of a sentence which have sovereign role of their own in the sentence.

First be clear that in the logo it is a by-line, and a by-line is meant to give a introductory sentence for the main title. So it is telling the feature of the thing named by the main title, i.e. telling the feature of 'Wikipedia'.

What I have learnt, when we first time tell adjective of a thing, we cannot join them, because that is a S+V+complement type of sentence/phrase. e.g. in following imaginary discussion:

सोमः - किं तव व्यवसायः?
राजेन्द्र:- अहं छायाचित्रकारः (photographer)।
सोमः- कस्याधीनतया कार्यं करोषि?
राजेन्द्रः- अहं तु शासकीयसेवारतः छायाचित्रकारः।

सोमः- कीदृशमिदं चित्रं तव हस्ते?
राजेन्द्रः- एतत् मया निर्मितं चित्रम्।
सोमः- न स्पष्टतया दृश्यते, अस्पष्टं किमिदं चित्रम्?
राजेन्द्रः- न खलु। इदं तु मनोहरं चित्रम्। अत्रान्धकारः इति कृत्वा न सम्यक् दृश्यते।

Here words in bold cannot be used in samasta form without loosing their due emphasis. e.g. -
अहं तु शासकीयसेवारतछायाचित्रकारः।
this doesnot mean what it should, one wants to say that छायाचित्रकारः has a विशेषण, which is शासकीयसेवारतः। Directly saying कर्मधारयसमस्तपद makes the sentence prejudiced, and irrelevant.

Similarly when one is saying इदं तु मनोहरं चित्रम्। he cannot say इदं तु मनोहरचित्रम्। otherwise direct feeling of listener is that there is a category of चित्रs which is called मनोहरचित्रम्, and this is that.
When one is qualifying his generic term, he has no right to joint the generic term with the very qualifier term. He has to be clear that first part is qualification and second is generic name.

When somebody orders me to consume a glass of Milk and When I want to say this sentence in reply: 'Milk is hot', in Sanskrit, i would say this sentence "दुग्धः अत्युष्णः"
If instead I say "अत्युष्णदुग्धः", arguing that compounding is a unique quality of Sanskrit so we should use it- we cannot say it is sound logic, because the sentence has undoubtedly lost its meaning.

I have seen many instances and it has become part of my linguistic memory that this rule is highly used in ancient Sanskrit. e.g. see this स्वप्नवासवदत्तम् लिंक् http://books.google.co.in/books?id=QLks6FXA5xEC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false here u will see:-

  • आश्रमविरुद्धः खल्वेषः जनः, not एष खलु आश्रमविरुद्धजनः because adjective is qualifier and it is S+V+complement type sentence. (page-16)
  • तत्र खल्वतिदारुणं व्यसनं संवृत्तम्। not तत्र खल्वतिदारुणव्यसनं संवृत्तम्। because speaker wants to imply that he is qualifying the व्यसनम्, and not giving it as a routine word.(p-18)
  • दिष्ट्या सफलं मे तपोवनाभिगमनम् think of how it would look if- दिष्ट्या मे सफलतपोवनाभिगमनम्। (कर्मधारय used). (p-12)
  • महती खल्वस्य व्यपाश्रयणा (p-12, second last dialogue) not अस्य खलु महाव्यपाश्रयणा (कर्मधारय used).
  • इह मां निक्षेप्तुकाम आर्ययौगन्धरायणः (p-12, third last dialogue) not इह मां निक्षेप्तुकामार्ययौगन्धरायणः। (here one more thing can be noted that आर्यः यौगन्धरायणः is not used, because आर्य is not the adjective which speaker wants to emphasize, it is something taken as granted. Had speaker wished to say "Mean people may not help but noble Yogandharana will certainly do.", he would have used, "अधमास्तु साहाय्याद् विरताः भवेयुः, परं न स आर्यः यौगन्धरायणः" .
  • A fit example is : (when speaker introduces a person that who he is, like we want to introduce what this 'wikipedia' is) अस्त्युज्जयिनीयो राजा प्रद्योतो नाम (p-28), not अस्त्युज्जयिनीयराजा प्रद्योतो नाम।
अस्ति स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशो विकिपीडिया नाम।
अस्ति उज्जयिनीयो राजा प्रद्योतो नाम।
  • एवमुज्जयिनीयो जनो मन्त्रयते , not एवम् उज्जयिनीयजनो मन्त्रयते। (p-28)
  • शक्यं भणितुं शरचापहीनः कामदेव इति। (p-34) not शक्यं भणितुं शरचापहीनकामदेवः इति।

And in मृच्छकटिकम् ( Here: http://books.google.co.in/books?id=OYqI4-O_bQ4C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false)-

  • रदनिका खल्वहं संयतमुखी। not अहं खलु संयतमुखीरदनिका।
  • सर्वकालमित्रं मैत्रेयः प्राप्तः not सर्वकालमित्रमैत्रेयः प्राप्तः। (p-29)

In this way, I have seen that there is no instance where the qualifier is joined with qualified term in a sentence where expounding the विशेष्य is the motive of the sentence. If we join them then it is not possible to show emphasis of the sentence, and it becomes a monotonous utterance, since parts of a single पद don't normally have varying emphasis in Sanskrit. Though Panini talks of उदात्त स्वर being used in parts of a single word, for varying emphasis; but those are rarely used in Classical Sanskrit, if at all. So breaking apart is necessary.
Difference between स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः and स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः is comparable to difference between these two in English:
"Wikipedia, The free encyclopedia", vs. "Wikipedia, The free-encyclopedia" (despite the fact that these two languages are different and their nature is different, these two are analogous).
इति मम मतम् अस्मिन् विषये।
Note: This is just to put my doubts on-record, so that, if in future somebody has got a convincing reply to them, he/she may write hereafter.
-Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०७:५९, २५ फ़ेब्रुवरि २०१२ (UTC)

Featured articles on main page संपादित करें

Dear Community members, I would like to bring it to the notice of the community that there have been quite a few good articles coming up on the sa-wp and its time we keep track of all our featured articles. Along with this, we can also search for some of the good articles that have been coming up these days. We also need cleaning up of this Category and thereby also start a nominations page for the same. I have got a good number of nominations for the featured articles. अभिरामः १३:२२, १९ मार्च् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Oh yes, we're running out of articles for the main page. Can you list out the articles you think deserve the yellow star?Rao7Talk १३:२८, २० मार्च् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]
How about a separate page for nominations?? Some of them which deserve nominations are as follows:
  1. भारतस्य संविधानम्
  2. ए. आर्. रहमान्
  3. एम्. एस्. सुब्बुलक्षमीः
  4. नौशादः
  5. ओ. पी. नय्यरः
  6. मन्ना डे
  7. ए. आर्. रहमानस्य प्रशस्तिपुरस्काराणाम् आवली
  8. सङ्गीतम्

अभिरामः १३:३७, २० मार्च् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

A noticeboard would be nice, but considering that we have nearly 5 moderately-inactive Village Pumps, we'd do better than start another one ;) . Abhiram, I think you should take the lead in assessing them and giving them the yellow star. Nothing big, just check the basics: Good images (Images from commons only), good structure, good language, interwikis, and having Internal Wikilinks is a huge plus. Rao7Talk १३:४१, २० मार्च् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Design changes for the main page संपादित करें

Dear community members, There is a need for good looking design for the main page. I think that the present design has become a bit obsolete. The Samskrit Wikipedia is growing day in and day out. We need to make the main page look colourful to attract more people here. I request the community to discuss upon this matter and come to a conclusion. अभिरामः

I am totally confused; the above message is written by user:Samvith2011 but the signatures are those of user:sbblr0803 i.e. अभिरामः; as far as I know these two are provably distinct users. Please disentangle this puzzle. :) -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०५:२७, ४ एप्रिल् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Dear Hemanth, Your doubt is true, it was written by user:sbblr0803 in user:samvith2011's account which is not allowed. But, as of now, the idea was of user:sbblr0803 :) अभिरामः १२:१२, २७ एप्रिल् २०१२ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

नूतनाय लोगो-चिह्नाय छन्दाकलनम् संपादित करें


sa: प्रियाः सदस्याः, अत्र नूतन-लोगोचिह्नं प्रदर्श्यते। यथानिर्णीतं मया अत्र संशोधनानि विहितानि सन्ति (135x155px, svg प्रारूपे, सम्यक् अक्षररूपाणि इत्येतानि)। द्वेऽपि चित्रे एकस्या एव सञ्चिकायाः निरूपणानि सन्ति। सदस्यैः अत्र समर्थनम्/विरोधः इति लिख्यताम् इति निवेदनम्। यस्मात् इतरे विषयाः पूर्वे एव निर्णीताः एतत् केवलम् औपचारिकं मतप्रदर्शनम् अस्ति, येन बग्ज़िल्ला इत्यस्मिन् प्रस्तावः शीघ्रं स्वीकृतः स्यात्। अनेन विकिपीडियायाः मुखपृष्ठस्था महत्तमा अशुद्धिः (विकिपीडिय इति शब्दः) निवारिता भवेत्, संस्कृतविकिपीडिया च सर्वेभ्यः शुद्धिकारकः प्रकल्पः स्याद् इति काङ्क्षे।

(यद्यपि मम मते स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः इत्येव स्यात् परन्तु समयाभावे, विकिपीडियाप्रगतिनिमित्ते च यथानिर्णीतं स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः इति लिखितम् अत्र)।

en: Dear Community Members, here is shown the new logo. As per decision, I have incorporated corrections (135X155 px, svg format, correct fonts etc.). Both the renderings are of the same image file. I request members to write Support/oppose [as applicable]. As other issues are already decided, this is only a formal voting, so that the proposal fufills Bugzilla requirements. By this, the greatest error on the main page (विकिपीडिय [instead of विकिपीडिया]) would go, and Sanskrit wikipedia would stand as a purifying project for all , this is my aspiration.
(Though in my opinion it should have been स्वतन्त्रो विश्वकोशः, but due to lack of time, and to let wikipedia progress [despite differences], I've written स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः).


-Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १९:४९, १२ सप्तम्बर् २०१२ (UTC)

समर्थनानि (Support) संपादित करें
  •   समर्थनम्। प्रस्तावकत्वेन। -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) १९:५४, १२ सप्तम्बर् २०१२ (UTC)
विरोधाः (सकारणम्) (Oppose) संपादित करें

मत्कुणः सूचितः (Bug Filed) संपादित करें

sa: अनेन सहैव मया अस्मिन् विषये मत्कुणसूचना अत्र निवेशिता - https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40222
en: Along with this I have filed the bug here - https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40222 . -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०७:००, १४ सप्तम्बर् २०१२ (UTC)

  कृतम्। अनेन सहैव जिमिवेल्समहोदयकृतपरियोजनायां विकिपीडियानाम्नि विश्वकोशे लोगो-चिह्न-परिवर्तनं सम्पूर्णम्। अस्मिन्नवसरे सर्वेषां विकिपीडियाप्रयोक्तृणाम् अभिनन्दनानि।

विकिपीडियायाः मुखपृष्ठं तु इदानीं दूषणरहितम्। अस्माकं आगामिकार्यं तु तत्रस्थानां रक्तानुबन्धानां नीलीकरणम्। यतो हि इदमेकं प्रमुखं मानदण्डं विकिपीडियास्वास्थ्ये। सर्वे यत्र मुखपृष्ठस्थानुबन्धास्तु नीलाः, तत्र सदस्यानां सक्रियत्वं प्रमाणीभवति। अपि च नवागतानां रुचिरपि वर्धते, क्लिक्कारेण पृष्ठं लभ्यते चेत्। सर्वेभ्यः शुभाशयाः। -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०६:२२, २५ सप्तम्बर् २०१२ (UTC)

विकिपीडिया चिह्नम् : पुनर्विचिन्तनार्थं समर्पितम् संपादित करें

On the basis of recent logo modification, I am submitting here my communication to Shri. Odder for review/rethinking from other members of Sanskrit Wikipedia:

Please consider स्वतन्त्रसर्वविज्ञानकोशः as the tagline संपादित करें

Hai Odder, noticed the newer version of Sanskrit Wikipedia logo and the modifications made later. The logo looks great and your work is highly appreciable. In Sanskrit, it is customary to use the danda chihnas ("॥") (full stops, as you said) on both sides of the title/heading. The use of danda chihnas gave the logo a traditional and Sanskrit-style look. Great. However, I should register my difference in opinion about the translation of the tagline ‘The free encyclopedia’. The tagline now used in Sanskrit is स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः which is not an apt word. It must be स्वतन्त्रसर्वविज्ञानकोशः on the basis of following points:

  • The term विश्वकोशः is neither a defining word nor a proper translation for the word ‘encyclopedia’. The term विश्व refers to ‘all’ or ‘universal’ and कोशः refers to ‘a cell’ or ‘chamber’. Hence the term विश्वकोशः translates to ‘a chamber of all, including physical objects’ whereas ‘encyclopedia’ is a collection of only valid/verifiable knowledge. Due to this, the use of term विज्ञान (knowledge) is necessary in between विश्व and कोशः. Avoiding विज्ञान for getting a smaller/simpler word is not justifiable. It may be noted that the term विश्व can come up with two different meanings (i) ‘all’ and (ii) the ‘world’/’universe’. Hence, it is suggested to use सर्व instead of विश्व. The term सर्व always mean ‘all’. Hence, the correct translation of the term ‘encyclopaedia’ is सर्वविज्ञानकोशः, not विश्वकोशः.
  • The opposition from some Wikipedians against the use of word विज्ञान is mainly due to the fact that, in Hindi and in other Hindi-affected languages like Gujarati, Marathi etc. this term is used as a translation for ‘Science’. Due to the misconception that the word विज्ञान is translation for Science, the people who speak Hindi or Hindi-affected languages like Marathi/Gujarati/Bengali etc. generally oppose the use of the term विज्ञान as Knowledge. But in Sanskrit, the meaning of विज्ञान is different. In Sanskrit विज्ञान means ‘Valuable Knowledge' (i.e. not all kind of knowledge, but has some importance) विशिष्टं ज्ञानं इति. Similarly, in Sanskrit, the term वैज्ञानिक does not mean Scientist. It refers only to a wise person, or a learned person. In Sanskrit, the use of the term विज्ञान is highly justifiable, and necessary.
  • As already pointed out, in Sanskrit, कोशः means a 'cell' or pocket or some compartment/chamber which can be used for collection. Hence, to imply the meaning of encyclopedia as a collection of all knowledge, all the three words सर्व-, विज्ञान-, and कोशः are required and necessary. If we use विश्वकोश only, it will not give the exact meaning. Hence, as the translation of ‘ encyclopedia’, the term सर्वविज्ञानकोशः is preferred to विश्वकोशः

स्वतन्त्र- refers to 'Free' or 'Independent'. Hence I request you to use ‘स्वतन्त्रसर्वविज्ञानकोशः’ as the translation of ‘The free encyclopedia’ in the new logo. -Naveen Sankar (talk) 10:29, 8 April 2013 (UTC)--नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) १०:३३, ८ एप्रिल् २०१३ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

Re:Sanskrit Wikipedia logo (Odder's reply-copied from Commons)
Hi Naveen,
thank you for the message and your kind words, I appreciate that! As far as the tagline in the logo is concerned, I included that wording simply because it was what Hemant wikikosh suggested to me, and it looked like the consensus achieved during the linked dicussion on Sanskrit Wikipedia.
Let me point out that I am unable—and unwilling—to get involved in this discussion due to not being able to read Sanskrit. I understand that having a correct logo is no laughing matter for a Wikipedia community, and I wouldn't like to have to change the tagline back and forth depending on the views of certain community members. I will refrain from making further changes to the logo until you can point me to a community consensus to have it changed; please discuss this (again) with the wider Sanskrit Wikipedia community before turning to me. odder 11:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Reply to Odder in Commons
Dear Odder, thank you for your reply. As you have pointed out, having a correct logo is very important and we also don't like to change the tagline back and forth depending on the views of certain community members. I will try my best to reach the community consensus. Anyway, I request you to see the experimental image, that I have created, incorporating my suggestions here. When there is a consensus on the matter of tagline, you may please develop actual logo based on this. It can also be noted that using the term स्वतन्त्रविश्वकोशः invite the problem of rendering of श्व also. The श्व used in this logo is in modern style. The traditional style श्व is as in this logo. As far as Sanskrit is concerned, the traditional style is preferred to modern style. I hope, these issues will be discussed and solved in Sanskrit Wikipedia. Waiting eagerly for a rectified svg logo ---Naveen Sankar (talk) 14:49, 8 April 2013 (UTC)-नवीनशङ्करः (चर्चा) १४:५९, ८ एप्रिल् २०१३ (UTC)उत्तर दें[उत्तर दें]

विकिसूक्तौ लोगोचिह्ने किञ्चित् संशोधनार्थं छन्दाकलनम् संपादित करें

नमस्कारः, विकिसूक्तौ यथाऽस्माकं योगदातारः इच्छन्ति, लोगोचिह्ने विकिसूक्तयः इत्यस्य स्थाने विकिसूक्तिः इति शब्दः समावेष्टव्यः अस्ति। तदर्थं तत्र छन्दाकलनम् आरब्धं कृपया तत्र स्वमतं प्रकाशितव्यम्। धन्यवादाः। -Hemant wikikosh (चर्चा) ०३:२१, १७ जूलय् २०१३ (UTC)

No one needs free knowledge in Esperanto संपादित करें

There is a current discussion on German Wikipedia on a decision of Asaf Bartov, Head of WMF Grants and Global South Partnerships, Wikimedia Foundation, who rejected a request for funding a proposal from wikipedians from eowiki one year ago with the explanation the existence, cultivation, and growth of the Esperanto Wikipedia does not advance our educational mission. No one needs free knowledge in Esperanto. On meta there has also started a discussion about that decision. --Holder (चर्चा) १०:४७, ५ मई २०१४ (UTC)

लेखस्य शीर्षकम् संपादित करें

सर्वेभ्यः प्रणामाः ! विकिपीडिया तु एकः स्वतन्त्रः विश्वकोशः । अत्र सर्वेषां मतानुगुणमेव नीतीनां (policy) निर्धारणं भवति । परन्तु सं-विकि-जालस्थाने योजकानां प्रोत्साहनस्य अभावात् नीतिविषये निर्णयाः नाभूवन् । अतः अहं सं-विकि-जालस्थानस्य नीतिनिर्धारणप्रक्रियायै कार्यम् आरब्धुम् इच्छामि । कृपया सर्वे योजकाः, प्रबन्धकाः च नीतिनिर्धारणप्रक्रियायां भागं वहन्तु इति प्रार्थना । एवं न क्रीयते चेत्, एकस्य जनस्य सङ्कुचितविचाराधारेण नीतिनिर्धारणं भविष्यति । अनेन जनसामान्येभ्यः सं-विकि-जालस्थाने कार्यं पराधीनं भविष्यति, यथा अधुना अस्ति ।

विकिपीडिया:लेखस्य शीर्षकम् इत्यत्र शीर्षकस्य या नीतिः अस्ति, तत्र केचन सङ्कुचितविचारधारायाः नियमाः विद्यन्ते । तेन शीर्षकस्य विषये पौनःपुन्येन भ्रमाः, कलहाः, मतान्तराणि च उद्भवन्तः सन्ति । प्रबन्धकेन तस्याः नीतेः प्रस्थापनम् अन्ययोजकानां मतम् अस्वीकृत्वैव कृतम् अस्ति । यतो हि अन्ये योजकाः नीतिविषयचर्चा भागं न वहन्ति इति । परन्तु अधुना लेखस्य शीर्षकस्य विषये नीतेः अत्यावश्यकता उद्भूता अस्ति । अत्र शीर्षकनीतिविषये एका नीतिः सज्जा अस्ति । परन्तु सा नीतिः एव निर्धारिता इति न । यतो हि अन्ययोजकानां मतानि अपि नीतिप्रक्रियायाम् अतिमहत्त्वपूर्णानि । NehalDaveND (✉✉) ०९:२४, २० जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)

समर्थनम् संपादित करें

 Y यदुपरि लेखस्य शीर्षकम् इति विभागे उल्लिखितम् अस्ति तत् अर्थपूर्णं, योग्यं च इति मे मतम् । यः नूतनः लेखः लेखस्य शीर्षकनाम्ना सज्जः, सः विकि-जालस्थानस्य नीत्याधारितः इत्यपि मे मतिः । अतः सः नूतनः लेखः जालस्थाने विकिपीडिया:लेखस्य शीर्षकम् इत्यत्र शीघ्रातिशीघ्रं योजनीयः । Srivatsa B R (चर्चा) ०५:०३, २१ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)
 Y उत्तमः विचारः एव। मम अन्यः एकः अभिप्रायः वर्तते। यथा अन्यासु भाषासु विकिपुटे विकल्पेन लिखितं भवति तथैव अत्रापि कर्तुं शक्यते। उदाहरणरुपेण - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi इति पुटे (Redirected from Gandhi) इति लिखितम् अस्ति। शीर्षकः तु 'Mahatma Gandhi' एव। पुनश्च लेखस्य आरम्भे 'Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi' इति अपि लिखितम्। तेन यथा कथापि जनाः अन्वेषणं कुर्युः तत् पुटं प्राप्नुयुः। अत्र अस्माकं लक्ष्यद्वयम् इति मन्ये - शीर्षकस्य शुद्धता अपि च सरल-अन्वेषणम्। सस्नेहम् जिज्ञासुः (चर्चा) १८:४८, २१ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)
 Y सर्वे विचाराः योग्याः सन्ति । लेखस्य शीर्षकस्य विषये विचारः करणीयः कारणं यदि शीर्षकं शुद्धं भवेत्, तर्हि अन्वेषणाय सरलता भविष्यति । व्याकरणनियमानुसारम् एते नियमाः सन्ति अतः एते नियमाः शीघ्रातिशीघ्रं विकीपीडिया-जनैः अनुसरणीयाः । एतेभ्यः नूतनेभ्यः नियमेभ्यः मे समर्थनम् । NehalDaveND एवमेव कार्यं करोतु | Udit Sharma (चर्चा) ०६:५८, २८ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)

विरोधः संपादित करें

 N सं.विकिपीडियाकृते नीतिनियमाः आवश्यकाः नूनम् । तत्रापि शीर्षकदानविषये याः नीतयः अत्र उपस्थापिताः ताः अनुसरणीयाः एव । संस्कृतभारत्याः बेङ्गलूरु नगरस्थ विकिपीडिया कार्यालये आरम्भतः कार्याणि कथं भवन्ति इति मया प्रत्यक्षं दृष्टम् । यस्मिन् कस्मिन्नपि विषये निर्धारणात् पूर्वं ज्येष्ठानाम् अभिप्रायः तत्तद्विषये विदुषां च मतं ज्ञात्वैव किमपि उपस्थाप्यते जालपुटे । उदाहरणाय आरम्भे यदा गणकयन्त्रसम्बद्धानां पारिभाषिकशब्दानां सूक्तसंस्कृतशब्दान्वेषणे महानेव प्रयासः परिश्रमश्च कृतः । एवं यत्किमपि झटिति न निर्णीयते एव । अनेकेषाम् अभिप्रायं स्वीकृत्य एव निर्णयः भविष्यति अत्र । यत् शुभया प्रस्तुतं शीर्षकविषये तदपि तथैव । निवेशिते शीर्षकविषयके लेखे विप्रतिपत्तिः यदि स्यात् तर्हि तस्मिन्नेव सम्भाषणपुटे लेखनीयमिति विकिनीतिः । - Pankaja Rajagopal (चर्चा) ११:४८, २८ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)
भगिनी भवत्याः सक्रियता सं.विकि- कृते लाभादायिका भविष्यति इति मे विश्वासः । अत्र भवत्या यत् लिखितं तत् न्यायसङ्गतं न दृश्यते । अन्यस्य प्रभावः भवत्याः लेखे स्पष्टतया अनुभवाम्यहम् । तथापि अहं निवेदयामि यत्, भवती कारणेन सह अयोग्यतायाः विषये वक्तुं शक्नोति । अत्र यत् समर्थनम् अभवत्, तेषां पार्श्वे कारणानि सन्ति यथा -- 1. सर्वसम्मत्या निर्णयाः भवेयुः 2. तत्र ये नियमाः लिखिताः ते व्याकरणानुगुणं निर्मिताः 3. गुरुभिः सह चर्चिताः निर्णयाः सन्ति इत्यादयः.... भवती यदि गुरुभिः सह चर्चां कृत्वा विरोधं करोति चेत् अस्माकं दोषस्य ज्ञानं भवति । भवती वदति अयोग्यम् अहं वदामि योग्यं तत्र प्रमाणं तु चर्चानन्तरमेव भवति । केचन विषयाः यदि अनिर्णिताः भवेयुः, तर्हि हानिः नास्ति । परन्तु अस्माभिः चर्चा कृता इत्येव मुख्यम् अस्ति । अतः प्रमाणेन सह लिखतु इति प्रार्थना । अन्यथा भवत्याः असर्थनम् अयोग्यं सिद्धयिष्यति । NehalDaveND (✉✉) ०६:२५, २९ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)

तटस्थ संपादित करें

प्रणामाः नेहाल महोदय ! It’s been a great pleasure to observe discussions happening on Article Title. There have been few points that I would like to bring to your notice.

  1. Everything that goes into the Wikipedia is bound by the Pillars of Wikipedia, one of which is Neutral Point of View (NPOV). That is, any statement made has to be unbiased, non-provocative. It should only be the information and not your own thoughts, which holds good with the Article Title as well.
  2. Wikipedia in every language, including Samskrit has a lot of users, not just in a country or a province, but worldwide. The Article Title should be in such a way, everyone on this earth has to have clarity and not just people in a province or a country alone.
  3. Since, you have been keen on the policies of Wikipedia for Article Title; I would like to remind you that there are also other policies in Wikipedia. One such policy states that, there has to be no personal attack on any individual in Wikipedia, which seems to be violated by your writings here.
  4. For the sake of Articles with many names, it is good to see a page only with all Article Titles. It would be better to move such pages to Disambiguation Page, marked under Special Pages.
  5. There are 3 important statements that I’ve to quote from Wikipedia
In discussing the appropriate title of an article, remember that the choice of title is not dependent on whether a name is "right" in a moral or political sense. Nor does the use of a name in the title of one article require that all related articles use the same name in their titles

While titles for articles are subject to consensus, do not invent names or use extremely uncommon names as a means of compromising between opposing points of view. Wikipedia describes current usage but cannot prescribe a particular usage or invent new names.

Debating controversial titles is often unproductive, and there are many other ways to help improve Wikipedia.

The last sentence sums it up. I think it is better to start improving it in many other ways to be bigger, better and a vibrant Samskrit Wikipedia than fight. It is always welcome to have a good discussion on Wikipedia, but not at the cost of deterring other editors. अभिरामः १०:०१, २९ जुलाई २०१४ (UTC)

शास्त्रमन्थनप्रकल्पः संपादित करें


प्रिय! संस्कृतविकिसम्पादकाः,

शास्त्रमन्थनम् इति नामधेयः अभूतपूर्वः प्रकल्पः परिकल्प्यते अस्माभिः। शास्त्रसम्बद्धानां गहनविषयाणां रहस्योद्धारनिमित्तं प्रस्तूयते इयं लघ्वी प्रचेष्टा । प्रकल्पेऽस्मिन् विविधसंस्कृतविश्वविद्यालयेषु शोधसंस्थासु च लेखरूपेण सञ्चितानि शोधपत्राणि संगृह्यन्ते विकिस्रोतसि । कृतभूरिपरिश्रमैः शोधकर्तृभिः गवेषिताः शास्त्रविषयाः विश्वव्याप्ताः भवन्ति अनेन प्रकल्पेन । षाण्मासिकी भवति अस्य प्रकल्पस्य समयव्याप्तिः । त्रिभिः योजकैः आवेद्यमानेऽस्मिन् प्रकल्पे प्रायः त्रिसहस्रं(३,०००) शोधपत्राणां सन्निवेशः विकिस्रोतसि लक्ष्यरूपेण स्वीकृतः । पूर्णाङ्गविवरणाय अवलोक्यताम् - शास्त्रमन्थनप्रकल्पः

शास्त्रमन्थनप्रकल्पस्य प्रस्तावकाः सन्ति-

  1. Shubha
  2. Sayant Mahato
  3. Chaitra

प्रकल्पस्य प्रस्तावस्य सुदृढीकरणाय स्वमतं ज्ञापयन्तु इति सम्पादकान् प्रति विनम्रनिवेदनम् ।

अभिप्रायाः संपादित करें

  समर्थनम्- संस्कृताभिमानिनः संस्कृतज्ञाः च ज्ञानसम्पादनं कर्तुम् एतत् उत्तमं योजनमस्ति । संस्कृतविद्यार्थिनः अनेन प्रेरिताः भवेयुः । देववाण्याम् इतोsप्यधिकं शोधकार्यं प्रचलेत्, सर्वेषां ज्ञानवृद्धिः कुर्यात् । शुभमस्तु । - Chandana

  समर्थनम्-This is a great work. This project helps readers to access the shastric knowledge more.-Shridhar V Hegde (चर्चा) १३:२७, २७ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम्-I support this great project. Mahalakshmi Prasanna (चर्चा) १४:२५, २८ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम्-संस्कृतजगति विद्यार्थिनः आधुनिकमाध्यमेन अन्वेषणं कर्तुं प्रेरिताः भविष्यन्ति । जेष्ठानां ज्ञानस्य उपरि अनुजानां सहजाधिकारः भवति, परन्तु देश-काल-स्थानादीनां दुष्करतायै अनुजाः तम् अधिकारं प्राप्तुं न शक्नुवन्ति उत तेभ्यः दुष्करं भवति । अनेन प्रकल्पेन सर्वं सरलं भविष्यति । अतः एषः येग्यः प्रयासः । NehalDaveND (✉✉) ०७:५०, २९ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम्- एतद् कार्यं बहु उपयोगाय भवति । एतानि शोधपत्राणि पठित्वा सामान्याः योजकाः अपि उत्तमान् लेखान् रचयितुम् अर्हन्ति । - Premaskanth13 (चर्चा) १२:०७, २९ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम् - I fully support this project. The proposed Project aims at bringing the original scriptures in to the realm of knowledge of a common reader interested in Sanskrit. This is an excellent idea to promote the unique Indian Culture and make it available to the whole world. Further this would help any person inclined to contribute articles to sa. Wikipedia - Narayanan V T (चर्चा) १२:२९, २९ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम् - I fully support this project.The different Research Papers from all Sanskrit Universities would give emmence knowledge to the reader and give inspiration to manke contributions in this field -S.Shailaja Rao (चर्चा) १२:४९, २९ सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  समर्थनम् - बहुषु विश्वविद्यालयेषु छात्रैः विविधानि शास्त्राणि अधीत्य संस्कृतभाषया लिखितानां शोधपत्राणां विकिस्रोतसि स्थापनं नाम अत्युत्तमः कश्चन प्रकल्पः इति मम अभिप्रायः । अधुना शास्त्रज्ञानार्जनेच्छुकानां विद्यार्थिनां बोद्धारः विरलाः । स्वयं शास्त्रग्रन्थान् आलोड्य तत्र स्थितान् विषयान् अवगन्तुं ज्ञानशक्तिह्रासः एतेषाम् । अपि च आधुनिकविद्याभ्यासरतानाम् एतेषां समयश्च अल्पः । एवं सति गणकयन्त्रयुगे अस्मिन् यदि शास्त्रविषयकाः प्रमाणभूताः लेखाः यदि सर्वैः उपलब्धुं शक्याः नूनम् अभिनन्दनार्होऽयं प्रयासः । - Pankaja Rajagopal (चर्चा) ०४:१०, ३० सितम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

आह्वानम् संपादित करें

विकिस्रोतसि शास्त्रमन्थनप्रकल्पसम्बद्धं विकिप्रकल्पपुटम् अत्र निर्मितम् अस्ति । अस्याः प्रकल्पयोजनायाः यशस्वितायै ये सहकर्तुम् उत्सुकाः ते सर्वे तस्मिन् पुटे स्वनाम योजयन्तु । कार्यस्य आरम्भानन्तरं तत्सम्बद्धसूचनाः प्रेषयिष्यन्ते । Shubha (चर्चा) ०५:०६, १३ अक्तूबर २०१४ (UTC)

'प्रवेशद्वार'पुटानां सर्जनम् (Creation of Portal pages) संपादित करें

संस्कृतविकिपीडियायाः संवर्धनदृष्ट्या 'प्रवेशद्वार'पुटानां सृष्टिः अपेक्षिता वर्तते । आङ्ग्लभाषया Portal इति कथ्यमानस्य अस्य विषये अधिकावगमनाय अत्र दृश्यताम् । उदाहरणार्थम् आङ्ग्लविकिपीडियायां भारतविषयकं प्रवेशद्वारम् एवं वर्तते - [१] प्रमुखविषयाणां प्रवेशद्वाराणां निर्माणेन पठितॄणां सम्पादकानाञ्च महत् प्रयोजनं भवति । निश्चिते विषये (उदा - संस्कृतम्/भारतम्) प्रवेशद्वारपुटानि यदि निर्मीयन्ते तर्हि विषयेस्मिन् कानि पुटानि विद्यन्ते, कानि निर्मातव्यानि इति सुलभतया अवगन्तुं शक्यते अनेन । इतः जनाकर्षणमपि वर्धते । इयं व्यवस्था अद्यत्वे संस्कृतविकिपीडियायां न विद्यते । अस्य सर्जनाय तान्त्रिकसाहाय्यम् अपेक्षितमस्ति । तस्य प्राप्त्यर्थं प्रयासः कर्तव्यः विद्यते । प्रवेशद्वारपुटानाम् आवश्यकतां भवन्तः सर्वे अनुमोदन्ते इति भावयामि । भवतां समर्थनम् अधः सूचयन्तु इति प्रार्थये । - Shubha (चर्चा) १३:४५, १२ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)

  1.   समर्थनम् Y - Shubha (चर्चा) १३:४५, १२ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  2.   समर्थनम् Y - रहमानुद्दीनः शेख् (चर्चा) १६:५८, १२ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  3.   समर्थनम् Y - N.R.Bahlika Rao (चर्चा) ०६:०३, १३ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  4.   समर्थनम् Y - NehalDaveND (✉✉) ०८:४९, १३ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  5.   समर्थनम् Y - Vaishnavi (चर्चा) ०९:३०, १३ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  6.   समर्थनम् Y-Sayant Mahato (चर्चा) ०९:४०, १३ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  7.   समर्थनम् Y- Premaskanth13 (चर्चा) ०७:३७, १५ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  8.   समर्थनम् Y-Narayanan V T (चर्चा) ०७:४५, १५ दिसम्बर २०१४ (UTC)
  9.   समर्थनम् Y - Udit Sharma (चर्चा) ११:४७, २७ मार्च २०१५ (UTC)