Talk:Gautamiputra Satakarni

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

India: Maharashtra / History 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
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).
	This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).

102, 125, 130?

Gautamiputra is said in this article to have reigned between 78-102 CE, but also to have been succeeded by his son in 130. Elsewhere Nahapana is mentioned to have been defeated by Gautamiputra in 125 CE. Which of this is right, or are these years all guesses? Soczyczi 07:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vikramaditya: a saka?

This article erroneously mentions Vikramaditya as a Saka ("Gautamiputra Satakarni also defeated the Saka king[citation needed] Vikramaditya"). Vikramaditya himself is credited with defeating Sakas and starting Vikram samvat to commemorate that event (see http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Vikramaditya). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.73.8 (talk) 23:57, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of image depicting Satakarni celebrating

The image showing naked women and Satakarni drinking and celebrating is vulgar. The image is just an imagination of a 19 th century artist and it doesn't depict the original situations that existed at that time. It may mislead the readers regarding the personality of Satakarni. There's no evidence that women are treated like that in his kingdom. I request your views on this. Krishna Kaasyap 19:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I support removal of the image. I don't think it's "vulgar", but it is not an accurate (or near-accurate) representation of the event it describes. utcursch | talk 20:51, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you utcursch. Krishna Kaasyap 21:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Should we wait some more time or can we remove the image now utcursch — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishna Kaasyap (talk • contribs) 09:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]