Talk:Ekalavya

message: I just removed the second paragraph from the section, "Self-Training in the Forest."  This appeared to be Original Research, which is not allowed per Wikipedia policy.  If I understand the section correctly the author was attempting to apply the story of Eklavya to the modern day idea of "virtual learning."  This type of application is definitely WP:OR unless you can cite a reliable source that makes this connection.  I have copied the paragraph I deleted below in case someone knows of a source that could be used.  If, however, such a source is found, this paragraph needs to be rephrased to be in compliance with the Manual of Style--specifically, the MOS states that we don't write in second person (see WP:YOU); furthermore, it should probably be moved to a separate section (something like "Modern interpretations of the tale").
::While you will enjoy the entire story of Mahabharata which depicts all aspects of life and how to tackle it, Eklavya's tale has a special significance in today's context. This would be first reference to virtual learning suggested in any document. Through his achievements Eklavya showed that virtual learning could be as good a institutional learning, if not better. Virtual learning (also called e-learning today) needs determination and personal discipline. It could be less costly too. The story of Eklavya, however, continues to demonstrate the power of the traditional system and elites over the non-traditional approach. The next section exemplifies this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwyrxian (talk • contribs) 04:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paragraph removed from "Self-Training in the Forest" 

message: I removed three paragraphs from the "Gura Dakshina" section.  The first, which was previously bolded, was clearly WP:OR (it was even written in first person), and I'm not even sure if it was directly related to this article.  
The next two paragraphs I took out are these:
::There are also related factual story about Drona asking the thumb from Ekalavya was on the conviction that since he had never thought Ekalavya any of his skills, Ekalavya would decline on giving the Gurudakshina.
::Further when Ekalavya's mother saw her beloved son's hand bleeding and knowing that her son's nature of not hurting anyone, she in the state of rage cursed that whosoever was responsible for loss of her son's thumb would die with a grief for his own son. 
Hence in the war, there comes a situation when Dronacharya gets killed in a grief on misinterpreting a statement that Aswathama (his son) got killed in the battle. In reality, it was only a elephant by name 'Ashwathama' that would have been killed.
I took these paragraphs out because I have no idea how to fix them.  Apologies to the original editor, but the English quality is quite poor.  Is this from a later part of the Mahabharata?  Or does "factual story" mean this is from some more historical source?  How does this information relate to what has gone before--is it a continuation of the same story, and interpretation of that story, or an entirely separate story?  Hopefully, someone with more familiarity with Eklavaya can edit this so that 1) the language itself is more clear and 2) it fits more coherently into the rest of the article.  Again, my apologies for deleting rather than improving, but I honestly have no idea what the idea is so I don't even know how to start.  Qwyrxian (talk) 04:18, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information removed from "Gura Dakshina" section 

message: An image used in this article, File:Eklavya Practicing Archery.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Eklavya Practicing Archery.JPG)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Eklavya Practicing Archery.JPG Nominated for Deletion

message: I agree with the editorial comments above. There was a good article here at one point, then someone with poor English flooded the article with an extra bad article. I will consolidate the two, although the additions over the past 6-9 months and I may petition for a page reversal. Article is in pretty bad shape as it is now. Comment on my talk page please if any feedback, thanks. Parsh (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits border on vandalism

message: An anon editor challenged the spelling here and after a brief look it does appear that although both are used Eklavya  is actually more common. 
* Wikipedia articles containing: Eklavya 174, Ekalavya 125 
* Google general search: Eklavya 884,000, Ekalavya 325,000
* Google search on .edu sites: Eklavya 1,550, Ekalavya 569
* Google search on .in sites: Eklavya 141,000, Ekalavya 33,700
* Google book search: Eklavya 9,040, Ekalavya 11,100
* Google Scholar: Eklavya 1,430, Ekalavya 810
* Google bews search: Eklavya 6,450, Ekalavya 3,330
:: So apart from google books all sources prefer Eklavya, although if moved Ekalavya should be acknowledged. I'll just leave this here so see if someone with knowledge, interest in the subject want to follow up. KylieTastic (talk) 14:20, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eklavya vs Ekalavya  

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion