Talk:Development of Carnatic music

message: The dates in this article are confusing. For example, under the Contributions to Carnatic music heading this sentence doesn't make sense:
In South India, around 1200 BC, that is around 800 years ago, a scholar by name “Shaarjnadeva” wrote a treatise, which was named as ”Sangeeta Ratnakara”.
1200 BC is about 3200 years ago... A Moondragon 00:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing timeline information 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 18:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Karnataka/Carnatic music appears to be a subset of this article and I suggest should be merged or redirected here. The slash in the title is contrary to guidelines (WP:MOS#Slashes and  WP:MOS#Article titles). ✤ JonHarder talk 13:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the merge proposal. It's not clear what "Karnataka/Carnatic music" covers that isn't part of music of Karnataka - if it is intended to cover some specific subset of "music of Karnataka", then it needs to be moved to a more appropriate title. Tuf-Kat (talk) 07:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

text: How is that article's scope different from Carnatic music? Tuf-Kat (talk) 02:05, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Please explain what the difference is. Tuf-Kat (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with Bhadani. Music of Karnataka covers various topics such as Carnatic music, Hindustani music, other devotional/light music and can even extend to topics on harvest music etc. Carnatic music, although called Karnataka Sangeetha Shastra (a nomenclature that came into existance due to the innovations and progress made during the reign of Vijayanagara Empire), is shared by all four southern states.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So it sounds like Karnataka/Carnatic music is meant to be about Carnatic music in Karnataka. Is that correct? If so, that's what the article should be titled. Tuf-Kat (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, the article Carnatic music is meant to be about Carnatic music in South India which comprises of four states. However, if one wishes, one could create a seperate article called Carnatic music in Karnataka, take sections of the existing Carnatic music that pertains only to Karnataka and elaborate on it. Dineshkannambadi (talk) 21:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: Karnataka/Carnatic music is specific site for  Karnataka music that came to the existence after revolutionary and innovative works during Vijaya Nagara  Empire time led by Sri Purandara Daasa. There is no evidence for the reason provided that British intended to give a new name ‘Carnatic’ for South Indian Music. The word ‘ Carnatic’ existed before British for other purposes not for music.  Many different forms of music have existed since ‘Vedas’ period.  That does not mean to say we have to start all websites from that time. ‘Karnataka/Carnatic’ is not bits and pieces of other sites. For e.g verifiable references provided are different than that provided in 'Carnatic Music' website. It is self contained site with valid and verifiable references.  As it was said several times it is not limited to ‘State of Karnataka’ It is for ‘Karnataka Music’ even beyond South India. Finally sites are not about keeping 'Simple' they are about providing accurate  information with clear and valid boundary conditions.  
It is time to get Ready for New Years Eve in US. Have Great Fun. ThanksNaadapriya (talk) 17:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've explained, the current title Karnataka/Carnatic music violates Wikipedia's titling guidelines, and it most certainly does not give "clear and valid boundary conditions". I don't understand what you claim that article's scope is supposed to be - can you point to another English webpage or book that has the same scope? Please also note Wikipedia does note vote - see Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion, so the number of comments opposing a merge is not really relevant if they aren't participating in the discussion. Tuf-Kat (talk) 06:33, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're mistaken. I really don't mean to be rude, but your written English is incomprehensible. Karnataka/Carnatic music does not have a "crystal clear" anything, as it is also not coherent English. 14:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebuttal to ‘Let us Keep Simple’ 

message: Karnataka/Carnatic site need to be kept independent since it addresses a very well defined topic with verifiable references. After visiting other sites cited above it is found that suggested merger is not warranted.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.55.122.99 (talk) 23:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger not needed