Contents

Talk:Kailasanathar Temple, Kanchipuram

A fact from Kailasanathar Temple, Kanchipuram appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 August 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Kailasanathar Temple is the oldest extant structure in Kanchipuram? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/August.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Tamil Nadu Low‑importance 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. This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (assessed as Mid-importance). Hinduism: Shaivism Mid‑importance 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. This article is supported by the Shaivism task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Photos taken by me during my trip to this temple, in Kancheepuram, are added now. --B Jambulingam (talk) 10:42, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re: this version with too many problems.

This an important temple from many perspectives... Dravida architecture, the history of Pallava dynasty, Kanchipuram history, Tamil traditions in arts (both sculpture and painting), Shaiva iconography and others. The article relies too much on tour guides, which typically focus on highlighting where to stay, where to eat, where to get a spa treatment, best time to visit, streets to get bargain deals in, a careless summary sometimes with passing impressions/mockery/humor of a few or zillion monuments in the area. They often are copying older editions of their own tour guides – or other sources such as wikipedia – blindly. Newspapers are no better. These are all non-WP:HISTRS. Important temples such as this one have been carefully studied by scholars for decades. They have published peer reviewed articles or sections and even books dedicated to such temples. We should rely on and summarize peer reviewed scholarship and similar high quality dedicated sources by people who are trained and qualified to explain perspectives mentioned above. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tour guide can be okay if you just want to cite a summary about where the monument is located or similar contemporary-era data and facts. For the rest, please find WP:RS. I have added quite a few scholarly sources, both in the article and the bibliography section to aid any editor(s) who may want to read them and help improve this important article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:56, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]