Talk:Ram Mandir

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Bibliography

  • Bakker, Hans T. (1984). Ayodhya, Part I: The History of Ayodhya from the 7th century BC to the middle of the 18th century. Institute of Indian Studies, University of Groningen. OCLC 769116023.
  • Jain, Meenakshi (2013), Rama and Ayodhya, New Delhi: Aryan Books, ISBN 978-8173054518
  • Jain, Meenakshi (2017), The Battle for Rama, New Delhi: Aryan Books, ISBN 978-81-7305-579-9
  • Kunal, Kishore (2016), Ayodhya Revisited, Prabhat Prakashan, pp. 335–, ISBN 978-81-8430-357-5
  • Layton, R.; Thomas, P. (2003). "Introduction". In Layton, R.; Stone, P.; Thomas, J. (eds.). Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property. Routledge. pp. 1–21. ISBN 978-1-134-60497-5.
  • Srivastava, Sushil (1991), The Disputed Mosque: A Historical Inquiry, Vistaar Publications, ISBN 978-81-7036-212-8 – via archive.org

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 April 2024

Add few texts at the end: Original: "The site of the temple is the subject of communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims in India, as it is the former location of the Babri Masjid mosque, which was built between 1528 and 1529. The idols of Rama and Sita were placed in the mosque in 1949, before it was attacked and demolished in 1992.[11][12][13]" Change: "The site of the temple is the subject of communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims in India, as it is the former location of the Babri Masjid mosque, which was built between 1528 and 1529. The idols of Rama and Sita were placed in the mosque in 1949, before it was attacked and demolished in 1992 by a mob organized by Vajpayee, LK Advani, Narendra Modi.[11][12][13]"

Reference: https://www.npr.org/2019/04/25/711412924/nearly-27-years-after-hindu-mob-destroyed-a-mosque-the-scars-in-india-remain-dee Sirole123 (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rejected per WP:UNDUE Undue controversial details to be avoided in lead, Also violates WP:BLP of living persons, who have been cleared of such allegations in the courts. Also note WP:NOT NEWS — Preceding unsigned comment added by RogerYg (talk • contribs) 08:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Important Visitor numbers need to be added

Important information widely reported in the WP:RS sources on Visitor numbers need to added.

https://www.businesstoday.in/markets/top-story/story/rs-85000-cr-makeover-ram-temple-at-ayodhya-could-attract-over-50-million-tourists-per-year-says-jefferies-414346-2024-01-22 Rs 85,000-cr makeover': Ram temple at Ayodhya could attract over 50 million tourists per year, says Jefferies Jan 22, 2024

Global brokerage firm Jefferies said in a report that the Ram temple at Ayodhya could lead to "unlocking of India's tourism potential" by attracting over 50 million tourists a year.

"The grand opening of the Ram temple at Ayodhya by PM Modi on Jan 22nd, is a big religious event. It also comes with a large economic impact as India gets a new tourist spot which could attract over 50 million tourists per year.

https://www.cnbctv18.com/travel/culture/ayodhya-ram-temple-50-million-visitors-expected-each-year-surpassing-tirupati-mecca-and-vatican-18880731.htm January 24, 2024 Ayodhya's Ram Temple may draw 50 million visitors annually, to surpass Tirupati, Mecca, and Vatican

With an expected 50 million visitors per year, the Ram Mandir is likely to become one of the top religious pilgrimage sites of the world.

Also, the 10 billion reported economic development plan The temple construction has been accompanied by a $10 billion transformation plan for Ayodhya, "encompassing a new airport, revamped railway station," and township development," stimulating various economic activities. https://www.wionews.com/india-news/ayodhyas-over-10bn-revamp-could-generate-around-3bn-in-tax-revenue-for-up-682522

RogerYg (talk) 08:50, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All these are predictions (WP:CRYSTALBALL). I'd say wait for an year when the annual reports come with specific and exact data. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, yes, we can wait for a year till actual annual data comes. I have removed the projected annual numbers from the lead accordingly.

We do have some exact numbers that can be added instead.

"After the opening of the Ram Temple to the public on Jan 23, 2024, Ayodhya has welcomed 2.4 million visitors in just 12 days."
https://travel.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/ministry/ayodhya-records-2-4-mn-visitors-in-12-days-govt-eyeing-historic-site-development-schemes-modi/107427042
As these are exact numbers, I have added them accordingly. Thanks RogerYg (talk) 22:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but ET is not reliable per WP:TOI. If you could get more cites describing the same values, we can consider. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 13:32, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, we also have cites from WP:Reliable sources. We can mention those numbers for better reliability
WP:INDIANEXP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#The_Indian_Express
  1. Five lakh visitors and counting: On Day 1 after Ayodhya Ram Temple inauguration, a rush for ‘first darshan’ https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ayodhya-ram-mandir-opens-public-devotees-9123100/
  2. "A little over a month since the inauguration of the Ram temple.. the temple is witnessing an average of 1-to-1.5 lakh pilgrims on a daily basis" https://indianexpress.com/article/india/ayodhya-ram-temple-visit-guidelines-what-to-carry-aarti-timings-9211777/
Thanks for helping improve the article. RogerYg (talk) 03:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About removing repeated and provoking statements in the article

I felt sorry for not discussing before editing in the article. But my acts were totally justified as the same paragraphs have been copied and pasted in the article multiple times with same citations. The dispute and the judicial judgement related to Ayodhya Ram Mandir is already there in History section in serial manner from medieval to modern day but it has been intentionally copy pasted this portion of history in the second paragraph and in the first paragraph of history section. As far as Ram is concerned Hindus believe him as a historical figure in Indian history. Ayodhya is not a mythical place but a historical place as per the epic Valmiki Ramayana. There are independent articles for the Ayodhya dispute, and other such stuffs. This article is about the Mandir (Hindu temple). Populating it with unwarranted topics only making it lenthy and lethargic to read. Prabhu Prasad Tripathy (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are not justified. We do not WP:CENSOR info that we WP:DONTLIKEIT. Hindus may believe Ram is a historical figure, but this is an encyclopedia, not an faith-based free hosting website. "Unwarranted" is in the eye of the beholder; a lot of people think that the Ram Mandir is a disgrace, a token of Hindu intolerance. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 15:54, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So you mean copy pasting the same lines with same citations in multiple section of article is justified? There are already pages which dedicated for dispute matter. Please do review the article. And by the way Hindus are quite tolerant and hospitable. Prabhu Prasad Tripathy (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide examples. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 19:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The whole paragraph after the intro section starting with "The site of the temple has been the subject of communal tensions" in the article has been copied with the same citations in the first paragraph of History section where as in the history section there was already these incidents mentioned from medieval period to modern time serially. Prabhu Prasad Tripathy (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the same paragraph it mentions,"The idols of Rama and Sita were placed in the mosque in 1949". It's factually wrong. The idols of Rama and his siblings were placed there. There was no idol of Sita there. Prabhu Prasad Tripathy (talk) 20:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The intro to the History-section is quite long indeed, but that is no excuse to remove it altogether, even less to remove all info regarding the controversies from the lead. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 20:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the lead, per MOS:LEAD it should provide a "summary of [the article's] most important contents", which definitely includes the controversy over its location and history. Dāsānudāsa (talk) 15:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Ram_Mandir"