Talk:Chitragupta

Hinduism High‑importance

	Hinduism portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

India Low‑importance

	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 was last assessed in May 2012.

Image[edit]

The image is fuzzy. Nothing can be made out. Request that it be changed. Rohitbd 14:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree with you. We will have to arrange for a better image. --Bhadani 14:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language[edit]

This is the english encyclopedia. Someone translate the images. It also appears that the text has been uploaded as an image in order to evade bots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhishekmathur (talk • contribs) 09:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too much sanskrit (or hindi) data. Please change it--Abhishek Jacob (talk) 09:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Sanskrit references are also inaccurate, so I'm going to axe them. The first Rig Veda reference refers to "Citra," not "Citragupta." Citragupta is NOT a Vedic deity. The Garuda Purana reference is fine as far as I'm aware, so I'll leave it. The other two seem totally bogus, and are left uncited anyway: the first seems to have been created from an extant invocation to Rudra, and when searched, the latter only brings up copies of this page or the Kayasthas page, in which all these "quotes" are repeated verbatim anyway. --Yoshiaki Abe (talk) 01:38, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hindi & english SUMIT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA (talk) 01:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement of Article[edit]

Can anyone make this article better?

${\mathfrak {ChitranshGaurav}}$ ^{( $Talk$ )} 18:01, 9 May 2024 IST [refresh]

The preceeding contribution is not time stamped, but dynamically specifying "now". This may be on intent. The contribution was made here, 10:14, 9 November 2012. JoergenB (talk) 15:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to have been started in Indian English mode, and by our consensus standards thus should be kept so. However, much of the present text is in bad English, and the Indian background is no excuse for this. (In my experience, Indian English in general is good, and mostly better than mine - I'm a Swede.) I also do not quite understand the logic in some places. Possibly, some "bridges" between different ideas got lost in earlier edits; I see that large parts were planned to be deleted.

I replaced "lac" with "hundred thousand", since I assume that that numeral was the intended one here. This could be seen as against our standards, as both this word and "crore" for ten millions it could be argued to belong to Indian English. However, "a hundred thousand" or "ten millions", respectively, should also be correct Indian English, I suppose. JoergenB (talk) 12:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]