Talk:Society of Rashtrakuta empire of Manyakheta

I dont think the title of this article is right. Same holds for other similarly named articles. I feel it should be something like "Social life in _____ empire/dynasty" or something like that. When I first saw the title "Society of Rashtrakuta..." I thought it was some organisation like "Society of Engineers" or something like that. Same holds for the categories too. Sarvagnya 23:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree social Life sounds better. I have followed the "Society" word in all the FA's because the reviewers had recommended that and felt that was right.

Here are the resaons: one could agrue that "Social life" is more like leisure, entertainment etc and a part of "overall society". In the Society sections in the FA's (Hoysala, western Chalukya, Vijayanagara Empire) there is a lot more in the society section than social life. Other issues discussed are women in administration, women in arts and martial fields, temple administration,

Sati, Devadasi et. It is difficult to envision many of these other areas discussed as an empires "Social life". This is why Society was used.Dineshkannambadi 23:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...the context of the word society when used with empire/dynasty, is certainly different than when it is used like "Society of Engineers". The dictionary I referred, (WordWeb) gave me this primary definition for the word Society: An extended social group having a distinctive cultural and economic organization. With this definition, the current names of these articles are pretty fine. I do not see any problems or ambiguity or misleading here.

On the other hand, Social life does not really convey all the components that are being covered in these articles. As I understand, Social life is part of a society. Eg: Women in Administration section cannot be covered in an article with title Social life of ... as the administration does not really come under social life. In other words, Social life is a subset of a society. Thanks, - KNM ^Talk 03:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dodgy

This article is based entirely on the work of Altekar, published in 1934. It is unlikely that this source remains accurate research. - Sitush (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading Conflation of Caste with Varna

The article seems to violate Wikipedia policy on Neutrality, strongly conflating Indian Varna with the Eurochristian concept of "Caste". It also makes unsubstantiated, anachronistic claims about "Widespread" nature of so called "Caste" and uses primary non-English sources as citations, again conflating social groups with Castes. 76.35.59.111 (talk) 01:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]