<article_title>Ahimsa</article_title>
<edit_user>Nikki311</edit_user>
<edit_time>Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:24:30 PM CEST</edit_time>
<edit_comment>cleaning up; made list into prose</edit_comment>
<edit_text>Historical Vedic religion
The historical Vedic religion, flourished in the Vedic period, which lasted till about the middle of the first millennium BC<strong>E</strong>. According to the opinion prevailing among modern scholars, ritual animal sacrifice with subsequent sacrifice of animals was a predominant custom, and the principle of non-violence was little known or not respected.&lt;ref&gt;Alsdorf p. 572-597; Walli, Koshelya: The Conception of Ahimsa in Indian Thought, Varanasi 1974, p. 113-145.&lt;/ref&gt;</edit_text>
<turn_user>Nikki311<turn_user>
<turn_time>Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:26:50 PM CEST</turn_time>
<turn_topicname>GA on hold</turn_topicname>
<turn_topictext>Hello. I will be doing the review for this article. There are a few things that really jump out at me when looking at the article, so here are a few things to fix: The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD. For an article this size, it should be about 2 or 3 full paragraphs, and it should adequately summarize all the main points made in the article.
--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC) Refs should go after punctuation, not in the middle of sentences.
Refs in middle of sentences after , or ; are excepted as shown in the example in Wikipedia:REF#Footnotes.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)I am aware of that rule. I was referring, specifically, to #17, 37, 39-42, 47, and 52. They are either in the midst of a sentence or before the , or ;. TealNikkiSalmon311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC) Ref 39-42 are kept in mid of sentences because they are refs for each Indian spiritual leader, if moved to the end of the sentence, it would be confusing which ref refers for which person.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)There are quite a few paragraphs that are one or two sentences long. Either merge them into other paragraphs, expand them, or delete them.
Can the reviewer please list them. Thanks.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:13, 21 April 2008 (UTC)No problem: the last paragraph of the lead, the only sentence under Hinduism (before Non-human life), first and third paragraphs under Modern times, and the last paragraph under Jainism. Also, the Buddhism section would be better in paragraph form, as opposed to a list. It is okay to have one or two short paragraphs (sometimes that can't be avoided), but it is best to fix as many as possible. TealNikkiSalmon311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC) I think "Modern times" is just fine it is at the moment, divided 3 paras: 1. leaders, background 2. Gandhi 3.'reverence for life' philosophy.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2008 (UTC)I don't know much about the religion related WikiProjects, but is there an infobox of some sort that can be put in the article? If not, that is okay.
don't any, which will emcompass all religions involved. Suggestions are welcome.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)I don't know any either. It is fine without one. TealNikkiSalmon311 14:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)The See Also section should be above the References section.
--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC) That's all for now. You have a week to make changes or I will fail the article. If you are still actively editing the article when the week is up, I have no problem allowing more time. Thanks a lot. TealNikkiSalmon311 21:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC) Okay. Good work. I've done a quick copy edit, and now everything seems to be in order. I'll pass the article. TealNikkiSalmon311 23:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)</turn_topictext>
<turn_text>Okay. Good work. I've done a quick copy edit, and now everything seems to be in order. I'll pass the article. </turn_text>