Talk:Maharashtri Prakrit

	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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Maharashtra (assessed as Low-importance).

Languages Low‑importance

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Vandalism again[edit]

This article is about Maharasshtri Prakrit and not modern Marathi language!

Nijgoykar (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Maharashtri Prakrit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:16, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment related to Maharashtri Prakrit article [From Cpt.a.haddock's talk page][edit]

I would certainly not categorize the below PDF link as 'dubious' since it is a page owned by the State Government of Maharashtra. https://marathibhasha.maharashtra.gov.in/Site/pdf/english/main.pdf

Also, providing hereby the landing page link and the cover page link for the 'Application for Classical Language': https://marathibhasha.maharashtra.gov.in/Site/Home/Index.aspx# https://marathibhasha.maharashtra.gov.in/Site/pdf/english/cover.pdf

By the way, below is a snippet which mentions Maharashtri language belonging to 2000 BCE era (page 78):

"Ketkar (1931, p.10) adds, “The Mahārāṣṭrī language had flourished during the times of Vararuci. An independent language of Maharashtra must have been developing since 200-300 years prior to this time. In other words, the time of the early development of Mahārāṣṭrī would date back to the second millennium before Christ."

Amit20081980 (talk) 15:40, 02 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Amit20081980: Hi. The fact that it is on a government site does not automatically make it a reliable source. There are also neutrality issues with an application for classical language status which is essentially an application to get a 100 crore grant and incidental political gains. It is perhaps a point in its favour that some academics appear in the application's byline, but as per WP:SCHOLARSHIP and WP:HISTRS, peer-reviewed publications, textbooks and such are what are considered reliable sources. Furthermore, opinions of Ketkar, Bhagawat, et al., are highly dated and more modern sources will be required.

Thank you for the p.76 quote; I appear to have missed that earlier. That said, the dates (or for that matter, the identity) of Vararuchi/Katyayana being spoken of in the excerpt are not reliably known (with the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE being the current oldest estimates that I can see) and the chronology in Ketkar's 1931 might have been completely different to current consensus. So, "200–300 years prior to this time" does not lend to the second millennium BCE estimate and even if it did, that does not mean that it can be generalised to 2000 BCE. Not all scholars (see Masica, The Indo-Aryan languages, p.46) appear to agree with the implication that Maharashtri was an independent language of Maharashtra either.

Please use the PDF to locate the original sources and, if reliable and relatively recent, cite them directly instead. For exceptional claims, please use multiple corroborating sources. I will have a look as well. Thanks.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 10:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cpt.a.haddock I found another source, which states that Prakrits (including Maharashtri) date back to 1500 BCE. I am adding a note in the article citing the below reference. I believe this should be ok https://books.google.co.in/books?id=6lPzhfNRZ9IC&pg=PA357&dq=Maharastri+prakrit+second+millenia&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2i_XVhtvUAhXCfrwKHV81ANYQ6AEIITAB#v=onepage&q&f=false

Amit20081980 (talk) 11:38, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Amit20081980: Hi, I've reworked the sentence into the section while sticking to the source. Please check and let me know if this is to your satisfaction. FWIW, the whole Sanskrit-Prakrit kerfuffle is fraught with inconsistencies. Dani, while reliable, is not an ideal source for this. So, please continue to be on the lookout for better sources. Thanks.--Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 08:25, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Improper information[edit]

This discussion has been disrupted by block evasion, ban evasion, or sockpuppetry from the following user:

Rajeshfadnavis (talk · contribs · block log · spi)

Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

~~This article seems messed up with Maharashtri and marathi.In few weeks I'll try to develop this. Rajeshfadnavis (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]