Talk:Alampur Navabrahma Temples

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alampur Navabrahma Temples article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

India: Telangana Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Telangana (assessed as Mid-importance).

Hinduism High‑importance

	Hinduism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hinduism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hinduism 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.HinduismWikipedia:WikiProject HinduismTemplate:WikiProject HinduismHinduism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Confused

Please see my recent edits, and the hidden query I've left. Now I've noticed Sangameswara Temple, Kurnool, and am really confused. Was this at the original site of the moved temple, or not? Thoughts? Johnbod (talk) 18:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: Several temples are named Sangameswara Temple, over there. I urge instead of relying on the local newspapers, we go with ASI, Michell and such sources. The one the newspapers are talking about is not the ancient one (but may be still ok to have an article on its own). This Sangameswara Temple in Alampur Telangana is, to the best of my knowledge. Does Michell state somewhere that the ancient monument is submerged for most of the year.... I don't remember he stating so, and would be very surprised. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:02, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think its more it's not the same ancient one. Comparing the google map with the site map of the Nava Brahma group in Michell, George, The Penguin Guide to the Monuments of India, Volume 1: Buddhist, Jain, Hindu, 1989, Penguin Books, ISBN 0140081445, the layout is just the same, but several names swopped around - Vishva, Garuda, Kumara etc. I know who I trust. Note that the claim you added that the group were moved to higher ground rather contradicts the other Michell book, which just says the barrier was built, and they have lost their river view. I suspect the not very RS tourist site has confused them with the Sangameswara Temple, which was moved - 20 km according to Michell. I don't believe the Alampur Navabrahma Temples have actually been moved at all. Prasad's very lengthy descriptions don't mention it that I can see. Johnbod (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michell is merely stating that a barrier was built. But many barriers were built in this area per ASI recommendations and he could be referring to any of them. Michell is not stating that the temple remains submerged most of the time, does he (if yes, which page, I must have missed it)? The ASI reports of 1980s and 1990s do mention transplanting the Sangameswara Temple along with the Navabrahma temples, as do non-ASI publications by their government (I recall reading a detailed 1986 report in India Foreign Review or some such publication, which described the transplantation process). I will try to get you a link, if I can. As always, I am fine with sticking with whatever the verifiable WP:RS are stating. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He is very clearly referring to the barrier immediately between the Navabrahma Temples and the river. Never mind the semi-submerged temple, which is miles away. Are you absolutely sure the ASI reports mention actually dismantling and moving the Navabrahma temples? Please check. Your original version mixed up the Sangameswara Temple and the Navabrahma temples, and their original locations. Johnbod (talk) 18:51, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnbod: See page 15 etc by Rao for the plans. See this by Sarma on staged transplantation of many temples (mentions flooding in the early part of the article, then discusses the plan to dismantle Sangameshwara, then their findings etc). On page 184, Sarma writes, "the re-erection of the Kudali Sangamesvara temple at Alampur was accomplished in January 1990". The report post-dates the one by Michell above. There is much detail about the Sangameswara Temple in this report which one of us, or someone, should summarize in an appropriate article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 19:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't really see these, but none of them seem to refer to the Navabrahma Temples. Johnbod (talk) 19:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were concerned about the Sangamesvara temple... whether it was transplanted or not. Let me check the rest. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 19:42, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should the page name be Navabrahma Temples, Alampur?

Should the page name be Navabrahma Temples, Alampur? Or even just "Navabrahma Temples" considering this is the only place which is referred to as such. Haven't seen too many sources refer to it as "Alampur Navabrahma Temples". Let me know your thoughts. Reo kwon (talk) 23:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]