Talk:Roots of Yoga

Roots of Yoga has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 24, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Yoga Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Yoga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Yoga, Hatha yoga, Yoga as exercise and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YogaWikipedia:WikiProject YogaTemplate:WikiProject YogaYoga articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Roots of Yoga/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 23:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC) Many thanks for taking this on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Fair use rationale - There's one part here I think needs tweaked. The copyright owners of the image on the rationale are listed as the authors, but generally the cover designer or the publisher are the holders of the copyright.

Added Publisher and details of original 1830 image. The cover designer is not mentioned anywhere.

Lead - Wikilink Sanskrit.

Done.

If Sanskrit is used as the language here, maybe "mainly Sanskrit" should be written as "mainly written in Sanskrit" or some such phrasing.

Done.

Infobox - Looks like we're going to need a citation for the page number. Also, if multiple editions of this work exist, it would probably be best to specify which edition the 540 pages is based off of, or to omit the page number alltogether.

Er, it's just the page count of the book. In or out, as you like. There's only one edition to date.

Publication - This section is only two sentences. I understand that there's a decent chance this can't be expanded and not give WP:UNDUE weight, but if it's possible, this could be a longer section. Have other editions been published? Additionally, if you decide to keep the page numbers, it can be cited here.

Done. Discovered the Italian translation to extend the coverage a little.

Is paperback a common enough concept that it doesn't have to be wikilinked?

Linked.

Synopsis

I know some reviewers don't like bulleted lists in prose, but I think this example is probably the best way to incorporate this information.

Noted.

Wikilink Vedas.

Done.

Reception - "practitioner of (postural) yoga " - Is there a specific reason that postural is in paranthesis?

Removed. Simply that most Westerners call 'modern postural yoga' "Yoga" but we can cope without the punctuation.

"The yoga teacher Richard Rosen writes that Roots of Yoga is appropriately in Penguin Classics as "this monumental anthology" of some 150 primary Sanskrit sources is destined to become a classic." - "is destined to become" doesn't really flow with the grammar of the rest of this sentence.

Reworded.

"Among academics, Neil Sims, reviewing Roots of Yoga on the Indian Philosophy Blog" - The review on the source indicates that it's the work of an "Ethan Mills", not Neil Sims. Mills is referenced in the next couple sentences as "In Mills' view".

Ethan Mills is the webmaster who posted the review, which the review's heading states is by Neil Sims.

References - Can we get a page number for ref RY20?

Nothing's really missing, it'd be across the whole book, but I've provided an example for chapter 1's intro and notes.

I'm fine with blogs as sources, if they're personal website or organizational productions of important topic-matter groups or subject-matter experts. Can you shed a little light on what exactly the Indian Philosophy Blog is?

It's a group of philosophers who specialize in Indian philosophical topics from Ājīvika to Yoga Śāstra; the site provides detailed, serious, reasoned criticism and explication of the whole subject in many hundreds of scholarly articles. It just happens to use a blog engine to organize the material.

Yoga Alliance is a major organization right?

Yes, it's the body that effectively standardizes yoga teacher training across the USA (and many other countries).

That's it for this review, I believe, Chiswick Chap. Well-written article and clearly passes WP:NBOOK. Hog Farm (talk) 21:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap: - After your explanations, I'm fine with the Indian Philosophy Blog as a source, as well as having the page numbers in the infobox. If you want to, you can remove the page numbers from the one ref that was suppose to be the whole book, as that's a very good reason not to list page numbers. Passing now. Hog Farm (talk) 15:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]