Talk:Revanta

Revanta has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 1, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 22, 2008.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that according to Hindu mythology, the deity Revanta (pictured) was born from the union of the sun-god Surya and his wife Saranya in the form of horse and mare?

Hinduism Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

India Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Successful good article nomination

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of June 1, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass (balanced)

2. Factually accurate?: Pass (increase references scope)

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass (for a small topic)

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass (alternative points of view and quotes will improve article)

5. Article stability? Pass (no edit wars recorded)

6. Images?: Pass (for a small topic passable but additional images are welcomed)

If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. It appears this article to the subject it covers provides sufficient information. Using furhter sources to provide a wider perspective is welcomed, but does not necessitates failing under any of the above criteria. Additional illustrations are welcomed. Wikidās -ॐ 11:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations to the contributors. However, it seems the reviewers missed something. The first sentence in Origins is garbled. I can't edit it because I can't guess what the correct form should hav been. Moreover, if the name occurs in the Rig-Veda, it can't be borrowed from Avestan. Rather, the Vedic and Iranian forms derive from a common source. The section also fails to mention the Vedic deity Mitra, the counterpart of Mithra. For these reasons, I think the article fails to clear criteria 1 and 2. I don't want to hurt people, so I am making this comment without logging in. I feel the GA status is not deserved as of now. Hope the editors will improve it.