curprev14:1014:10, 24 June 2024 103.6.156.74talk 151,151 bytes−49 ridiculous to asscosiate highly ficticious and pseudo-scientific concepts like language classification using comparitive method and use that to explain certain socio-cultural phenomenon. That is circular logic. A theory, not fact, cannot be used as evidence for another theory.undoTag: Visual edit
curprev04:1804:18, 22 May 2024 Kailash K Singhtalkcontribs 151,181 bytes−33 →Hindu Smritis: As is present in this wiki article itself, the yajnavalkya smriti doesn't have any references to Sati. In the source too, only Yajnavalkya is written and not the smriti. Hence modified the link to better resemble the source materialundoTags: Mobile editMobile web edit
curprev11:4911:49, 6 May 2024 86.43.183.21talk 151,376 bytes+141 This page has errors saying sati was a part of Hinduism. It wasn't and even Christians did it I fixed it. Don't change it now plz.undoTags: RevertedMobile editMobile web edit
curprev21:5221:52, 23 March 2024 Brusquedandeliontalkcontribs 150,278 bytes+245 →Prevalence: Eminently dishonest citation, the full quote refers to numbers from BEFORE 1815, and therefore, by definition, excludes the 1829 report by the Christian missionary organization. Moved the quote to a section where its use is not dishonest + light reorganization. Needs expansion, however.undoTags: Mobile editMobile web edit
curprev21:2121:21, 23 March 2024 Brusquedandeliontalkcontribs 150,033 bytes+17 Rv unexplained tense change; "Hindu" not "India" because it is documented outside India in Hindu communities e.g. in Bali, as mentioned in body of articleundoTags: Mobile editMobile web edit