Talk:Dwarka

Untitled

The lost city portion has not been given its due. The fact that the excavation is still on and the artifacts and the man made boulders are still being recovered has not been mentioned at all. Please refer to the below link

http://www.arianuova.org/arianuova.it/arianuova.it/Components/English/A12-Dwaraka.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prat ran (talk • contribs) 07:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

---

Name

This city is linked as 'Dwaraka' from the Main Page. Is that a typo? – 86.42.138.61

The names Dwarka and Dwaraka seem to be used interchangeably throughout this article, a consensus needs to be reached on what the city is actually called. Can anyone with knowledge of the subject please contribute here? – Quoth 00:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Dwaraka is the Sanskrit form of the name and Dwarka is probably the modern Gujarati version. The latter is most likely to be the official name.--Grammatical error 06:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I modified the article so that Dvaraka (more accurate than Dwaraka) refers to the ancient city and Dwarka (Dvarka would be more accurate, but the w is used in the official name) to the modern city. Is this a suitable compromise?--Grammatical error 18:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)jai dwarka dheesh

The name comes from old Slavic Shivait A-Rajan (people) "Dwarka, Dwarke, dVARi (like sVARga -"heaven or our galaxy") or Dverke, which means Gateway into the ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.58.72.36 (talk) 9:37 am, 21 December 2010, Tuesday (1 year, 4 months, 1 day ago) (UTC+0)

Of course will western and Hindu Scholars never aloud to give Krishna's/Kresnik/Hresni's city that name.. - in Slavic (such a SHOCK! ) - instead that it is a correct "etymology" Krishna in "pagan" Slovenia: (golden haired Kresnik, flying on a golden chair(=Vimana), fighting against Queen of snakes)...http://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kresnik_%28bog%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.198.78.233 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 21 April 2012

Citation

I've removed some Sris and Srimads (no honorifics), and some wild association between archaeology and the Mahabharata. You are very welcome to discuss speculations on such identifications, you just need to cite your source every time ("Mr. X connects Y with Z, see reference"). There is more than enough cranky hand-waving on Wikipedia already. dab (ᛏ) 22:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

hi, i noticed the last couple of paragraphs are not very grammatically sound. Overall the article is very interestingbut just needs cosmetic modifications. vm

Quality

I feel that the quality of this article is not up to the mark. And I see the liberal use of peacock terms. Also unverified information such "Even in Tsunami or Earthquake the temple was not destroyed" which looks more like personal admiration put to words should not be allowed. I request the groups responsible to clear the article up.

And to vm, sign the post wioth four '~' as mentioned above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijeth (talk • contribs) 09:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, and I am currently revising the article. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 05:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Improvements

This article needs much work. I have begun revising it, expanding short paragraphs, fixing general mistakes and omissions, and correcting grammar and style errors. It still, however, needs much work before it can move up on the quality scale. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 05:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

One can use the talk page to clear out confusions as well in case there are any.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat2011 19:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

In this article you have add more information about dwarka in research. Nik0304 (talk) 09:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate your suggestion and will certainly consider adding more detailed information about Dwarka. Krishnpriya123 (talk) 17:05, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

last ice age

during last ice age, which was some 16000 years ago, sea levels were some 300 meters farther from the present coastal line. Lot more land was above sea level. So it is quite possible and probable for a civilization to exist at that location. But, the time period is something needs to be comprehended. Current understanding shows that mankind was still in hunter gatherer phase and not in settled phase. But all that could change if more evidence is presented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.240.160 (talk) 03:07, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

As the ice started to melt, sea levels rose and land was submerged. All this happened so slowly over hundres of years so the people would have time to relocate. But, any argument saying that the city existed only 4000 years ago, which was during the early stages of Harrappan civilization, needs to be carefully examined, because the ice age reasoning does not explain the events 4000 years ag — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.240.160 (talk) 03:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Content

Some of this can be reinserted when written and sources well, it was a mess.

Geography

The modern city of Dwarka is located in the Devbhoomi Dwarka district of Gujarat. The city lies in the westernmost part of India.

Dwarka is a relatively flat region at sea level, having an average elevation of 0 metres.

Among seven holy sites of India

Moreover, Dwarka is one of seven most holy places for Hindus in India where Varanasi is considered as the holiest of the seven holy cities.

A Kṣetra is a sacred ground, a field of active power, a place where Moksha, final release can be obtained. The Garuda Purana enumerates eight sites as giver of Moksha, They are Ayodhya, Mathura, Māyā, Kāsi, Kāñchī, Avantikā, Purī and Dvārāvatī.

The Dwarakadhish Temple

File:Dwarakadhish gopura and swarg-dwar.JPG

Swarg Dwar

File:Rukmini temple.JPG

Rukmini temple at Dwarka

The present temple was built from 6th to 7th century, while the original temple was believed to have been built by Krishna's great grandson, King Vajra. The 5-storied temple is made of limestone and sand. A flag is hoisted in the temple tower five times each day. There are two gateways – Swarga Dwar, where pilgrims enter, and Moksha Dwar, where pilgrims exit. From the temple one can view the Sangam (confluence) of River Gomati flowing towards the sea. In Dwaraka, there are also shrines for Vasudeva, Devaki, Balarama and Revati, Subhadra, Rukmini Devi, Jambavati Devi and Satyabhama Devi.

There is a special temple for Rukmini Devi on the way to the Bet Dwarka temple. Bet Dwarka, a similar deity to Lord Dwarakanath, is also kept Template:Clarify in Bet Dwaraka. The temple of Bet Dwarka can be reached by boat. The temple has many shrines for Lakshmi Narayana, Trivikrama, Jambavati Devi, Satyabhama Devi and Rukmini Devi.

Holy City

File:Nageshwar Temple.jpg

Nageshwar Jyotirlinga Temple at Dwarka

The city derives its name from word dvar, meaning door or gate in Sanskrit. Dwarka is considered to be one of the holiest cities in Hinduism and one of the Char Dham along with Badrinath, Puri, Rameswaram. The city is especially respected by Vaishnavas.

The Jagatmandir temple, which houses the Dwarkadhish, a form of Krishna, is also located in Dwaraka.

Nageshvara Jyotirlinga, one of the 12 holy shrines of Shiva, is located near Dwaraka.

Dwarka is also the site of Dvaraka Pitha, one of the four cardinal mathas established by Adi Shankara, the others being those at Shringeri, Puri and Jyotirmath.

Sri Dwaraknath Mahatyam

Sri Dwarakanath
File:Dwarakdish.jpg Sri DwarakaNath Temple
Temple Name:	Sri Dwarakanath Temple
Alias Name:
God Name:	Kalyana Narayanan
Goddess Name:	Kalyana Nachiyaar, Rukmini Devi
Pushkarni:	Gomati Pushkarni
Vimanam:	HemaKoota Vimanam
Location:	Jamnagar
State and Country:	Gujarat, India

Adi Shankara had visited Dvarakadisha Shrine and had established the Dvaraka Pitha. The Lord here is dressed in Kalyana Kolam where he appears to be a Royal Wedding costume. It is one of the 108 Divya desams.

Darshan, Sevas and Festivals

There are many Darshan and Sevas for Lord Dwaraknath. The dress is changed accordingly. The Darshans follow the Pushti Marg Vaishnava scriptures established by Shree Vallabhacharya and Shree Vitheleshnathji. Dwarkadhish temple is a Pushti Marg Temple. The Darshan are

• Mangala
• Shringar
• Gval
• Rajbhog
• Uthapan
• Bhog
• Sandhya Aarati
• Shayan

Dwarka Kingdom

File:Dwarka.jpg

A Painting depicting Krishna's Dwarka made during Akbar's reign from the Smithsonian Institution

Dwarka is mentioned in the Mahabharata, the Harivansha, the Bhagavata Purana, the Skanda Purana, and the Vishnu Purana. It is said that this Dwarka was located near the site of the current city of Dwarka, but was eventually deserted and submerged into the sea.

Characteristics of the City

The city was built by Vishwakarma on the order of Lord Krishna. Land was reclaimed from the sea near the western shores of Saurashtra. A city was planned and built here. Dwarka was a planned city, on the banks of Gomati River. This city was also known as Dvaramati, Dvaravati and Kushsthali. It had six well-organized sectors, residential and commercial zones, wide roads, plazas, palaces and many public utilities. A hall called "Sudharma Sabha" was built to hold public meetings. The city also had a good sea harbour. The city had 700,000 palaces made of gold, silver and other precious stones. Each one of Lord Krishna's wives had her own palace. Also, the city had beautiful gardens filled with flowers of all seasons and beautiful lakes.

File:Sudama bows at the glimpse of Krishna's golden palace in Dwarka. ca 1775-1790 painting.jpg

Sudama bows at the glimpse of Krishna's golden palace in Dwarka. ca 1775–1790 painting

File:Dwarkadheesh temple.jpg

Dwarakadheesh temple in present Dwarka city, believed to have been originally built by Lord Krishna's grandson, Vajranabha, over the hari-griha (Lord Krishna's residential place)

Submersion into the Sea

After Krishna left the earth for Vaikuntha,about 36 years after the Mahabharat War (3138 BC), and the major Yadava leaders were killed in disputes among themselves, Arjuna went to Dwarka to bring Krishna's grandsons and the Yadava wives to Hastinapur, to safety. After Arjuna left Dwarka, it was submerged into the sea. Following is the account given by Arjuna, found in the Mahabharata:

The Vishnu Purana also mentions the submersion of Dwarka, stating Template:Quote

Marine archaeological findings

On 19 May 2001, India's Science and Technology Minister Murli Manohar Joshi announced the finding of ruins in the Gulf of Khambhat. The ruins, known as the Gulf of Khambhat Cultural Complex (GKCC), are located on the seabed of a nine-kilometer stretch off the coast of Gujarat province at a depth of about 40 m. The site was discovered by a team from the National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT) in December 2000 and investigated for six months with acoustic techniques.

A follow up investigation was conducted by the same institute in November 2001, which included dredging to recover artefacts. A round of further underwater explorations was made in the Gulf of Khambhat site by the NIOT team from 2003 to 2004, and the samples obtained of what was presumed to be pottery were sent to laboratories in Oxford, UK and Hannover, Germany, as well as several institutions within India, to be dated.

One of the main controversies is a piece of wood that was carbon dated to around 7500 BCE, a date which is used in arguments for a very early date for a city here. Dr. D.P. Agrawal, chairman of the Paleoclimate Group and founder of Carbon-14 testing facilities in India stated in an article in Frontline Magazine that the piece was dated twice, at separate laboratories. The NGRI in Hyderabad returned a date of 7190 BC and the BSIP in Hannover returned a date of 7545–7490 BC. Some archaeologists, Agrawal in particular, contest that the discovery of an ancient piece of wood does not imply the discovery of an ancient civilisation. Agrawal argues that the wood piece is a common find, given that 20,000 years ago the Arabian Sea was 100 meters lower than its current level, and that the gradual sea level rise submerged entire forests.

File:Dwarka1.jpg

"The sacred town and temples of Dwarka," from Grindlay's 'Scenery, Costumes and Architecture chiefly on the Western Side of India', London, 1826–30

Bet Dwarka

Bet Dwarka is famous for its temples dedicated to Lord Krishna and is of great importance in the ancient Hindu tradition. It and other coastal sites have ample antiquities, mainly potsherds, suggesting maritime trade and commerce with the Mediterranean countries around the Christian era. This flourishing harbour and religious capital is believed to have submerged under the sea after the Krishna left dwarka for vaikunth.

A team of archaeologists have carried out onshore and inter-tidal zone explorations and a few trial trenches were laid to trace a proper cultural sequence. The most potential sites, where a large number of antiquities were recovered are the sectors, Bet Dwarka-I, II, VI, and IX.

The findings of Bet Dwarka may be divided into two broad periods: Pre-historic period which includes a small seal of conch shell engraved with a three-headed animal motif, two inscriptions, a copper fishhook and late Harappan pottery (circa 1700–1400 BC) and the Historical period consisting of coins and pottery. Onshore and inter-tidal zone explorations have indicated some kind of shoreline shifting around the Bet Dwarka island as a few sites get submerged during high tide.

Offshore explorations near present Bet Dwarka brought to light a number of stone anchors of different types that include triangular, grapnel and ring stones. They are made out of locally available rocks and their period may also be similar to those found at Dwarka and other places. Recently, Roman antiquities including shreds of amphorae and a lead ingot and lead anchors were found. There is also an indication of a shipwreck of Roman period in Bet Dwarka waters.

The archaeological explorations at Bet Dwarka Island have brought to light a large number of data on India's external overseas trade and commerce with western countries. Recent findings at the Bet Dwarka have shown evidence of Indo-Roman trade. India had an active maritime trade with Rome from the fourth century BCE to 4th century CE. These findings would concentrate on the time period from the first century BCE to the 2nd century CE. The discovery of the amphoras in Bet Dwarka is significant in view of the maritime history of India in concerned. There are remains of seven amphoras from which a black encrustation can be seen. This ware was mainly used for exporting wine and olive oil from the Roman Empire; it is most likely that these were wine amphoras. The discovery of a large quantity of amphora sherds suggests that Bet Dwarka had international trade contact during the early centuries of the Christian era. The findings present the possibility of a shipwreck in this area associated with Roman trade, though it is unlikely that the remains of the hull of the wreck survive. Thus the presence of Roman amphoras show that Roman ships reached Bet Dwarka waters earlier than has been previously noted. These same archaeological findings along with anchors have indicated the existence of several ports, jetties and anchoring points along the west coast of Indian. Though there are no remains of an ancient jetty at Bet Dwarka, the presence of stone anchors in the intertidal one indicates that the high tide was effectively used for anchoring the boats. The presence of a large number and variety of stone anchors in Bet Dwarka suggests that this was one of important ports in ancient times. The location of Bet Dwarka was favourable for safe anchorage in the past since it was protected from high waves and storms.

The proposal for the Dwarka museum, submitted by the Marine Archaeology Centre of the National Institute of Oceanography in 1999, involves laying a submarine acrylic tube through which visitors can view through glass windows the ruins of the city. The State Government of Gujarat and the Travel & Tourism Department of Gujarat are working on this proposal. When completed, it will be the first museum to be built under the sea.

Attack during Indo-Pakistani War of 1965

Dwarka was attacked on the night of 7 September 1965 by Pakistan Navy under Operation Dwarka. Dwarka was chosen for its proximity (200 km from Karachi Port). The Pakistani vessels fired over the main temple of Dwarka for more than 20 minutes. The ships fired around 50 shells each. Nearly all the shells remained unexploded.

Compositions

Mirabai, Surdas had composed lot of songs on Dwarakdish. The Alwars like Thirumalisai Alvar, Nammalvar, Periyalvar, Andal, Thondaradippodi Alvar, Tirumangai Alvar have sung in praise of Dwarakanath in Tamil.

Gurudwara

Gurdwara Sri Guru Nanka Dev Ji is located at Bet Dwaraka. Bhai Mohkam Singh (one of the Panj Pyaras of Guru Gobind Singh Ji) was born at Bet Dwarka.

File:Gurudwara Bet Dwarka.jpg

Gurudwara at Bet Dwarka

The origin of the name?

Dwarka (Listen) also spelled Dvarka, Dwaraka, and Dvaraka.........

Dwaraka = Dwa - Raka = Two cancers = Two arms = Двa ракa = две ръце....

Dwaraka = Dwa - Raka = Two rivers = Two kings = Две реки = двама царе...

Old Bulgarian City? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.90.230.235 (talk) 07:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

This is what we call "original research", see WP:NOR. We rely on what "reliable sources" say. See WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. Dougweller (talk) 11:20, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Broken refs

The following refs do not link to any full citations: "Dharaiya 1970", "Bandyopadhyay 2014", "Deshpande, p. 273.". – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Template:Ping Oversight. Done. Thanks. --Nvvchar. 15:42, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 1910

I'm very skeptical about using a source over a century old for " Around 2000 BC the Harappans of the Indus Valley traveled to the Kathiawar coast and maintained relations with Mesopotamia and Egypt by availing the ports of Dwarka, Bhagatrav, Bharuch and Lotha, which was also followed by the Assyrians.[10]According to ancient history, Krishna had settled down here after he defeated and killed his uncle Kamsa at Mathura, after Jarasndha atacked Mathura." This seems a bit too early for a start - see [1] and [2]. I'm not sure what evidence was relied upon as I can't read the journal, but it clearly wasn't the current archaeological evidence. And we certainly shouldn't be calling Krishna an historical figure. I'd like to see this use of the source justified please. Doug Weller (talk) 09:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

• Template:Ping Thanks for your valued views. I am not a history student and hence can not throw more light on the subject. The source used is a snippet. I have done extensive search related to this part of the text but could not find any more linking to trade with Mesopotamia and Egypt and Asiraya. May be you could help. Otherwise, I would prefer to delete this sentence. Ancient history has been changed to "legend".--Nvvchar. 06:05, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

• Template:Ping Thanks for your very polite reply. I also searched and could find nothing and agree that it should be deleted - the source is simply too old. As an aside, I think we should avoid snippets. The problem with snippets is that they lack context, and the next paragraph might explain why the author thinks that the text in the snippet is wrong. Or that there are alternative views, etc. Doug Weller (talk) 08:54, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Some concerns after a copy-edit on September 14, 2015

I have just finished going through the article Dwarka and making a few minor edits. I have four concerns: (Corinne (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC))

Template:Ping Thanks for the editing. The above queries have been clarified. Pl let me know what more changes are to be made. Nvvchar. 03:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Medieval period

1) In the section Dwarka#Archaeological evidence is the following sentence:

• From the typological classification of the anchors it is inferred that Dwarka had flourished as a port during the medieval period.

It might not be clear to an average reader what is meant by "the medieval period". Is this the medieval period (Middle Ages) in Europe or a different medieval period in India, or is it the same historical time period as in Europe, but in India? I know there is a section later in the article on the medieval period, and I ought to read it, but I wonder if this phrase could either be linked to another article or explained briefly with either a phrase or a date range-plus-country so that it is clear. Corinne (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

You are right. Medieval ages or period refers to period between 5th and 15th century. The archeological excavtions at Dwarka revealed antiquities of a period much eralier. It could be called the period of the Middle kingdoms of India. If you agree with htis I will make changes accordingly. Nvvchar. 03:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Nvvchar Yes, of course. Anything that is accurate and adds clarity. Corinne (talk) 03:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

• Changed to the period of the Middle kingdoms of India.--Nvvchar. 10:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

NvvcharWhat the source actually says is "The underwater structures lying off Dwarka arc the remains of a jetty. It is difficult to date these structures precisely, however the binding material suggests that it may be of the late medieval period. Discovery of a large number of stone anchors suggests that Dwarka was an important port since the historical period and continued till late medieval period." Doug Weller (talk) 12:25, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Pontiff

2) The last sentence in Dwarka#Early history is the following:

• In 885 AD, the pontiff of Shreemad Jagatguru Shankaracharya Peeth refurbished the temple.

I was surprised to see the word "pontiff" used in connection with a Hindu religious figure. In the west, the word is used only to refer to the Pope, in Rome. I wonder if this is a translation of a Hindu word, and whether there might be another word that is equally acceptable. This word is also used in another place in the article. Corinne (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

It has become a common usage in India to address the highest religious heads of Hindu religion. News papers frequently use this suffix for the Adi Shankarachrya. Seer is also another term in usage. If you want it to be changed then I will use the word "seer". Nvvchar. 03:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Joshua Jonathan What word do you think is the best word to use? Corinne (talk) 03:32, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

The original source for pontiff has been vanished; this blog may be the original source, though. Which is probably not WP:RS. The souce says "The head of the Shreemad Jagatguru Shankaracharya pith renovated the temple." Now, this head is head of the Sringeri Sharada Peetham, and Jagadguru is his title. So, this source has mixed the name of the matha and the itle of its head. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

NB: my knowledge of Indian geogarphy is limited, but to link Sharada Peeth, which probably is supposed to be the same as Sringeri Sharada Peetham in south India, to a temple in Sharda in Azad Kashmir, is painfull, to say the least... To link it to Sringeri Sharada Peetham, which is located in Karnataka, also seems unlikely. I guess Dvaraka Pitha is meant. Template:Yo, to the rescue please! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:34, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

The heads of all the Peeth are referred to in similar ways, "Jagadguru" etc. I think your guess that it must have been the head of Dwarakapeeth is correct. There is no reason for the head of another peeth to get involved here. - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

@JJ: Indeed, that blog is not RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:40, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Template:Od This was probably the original source; apparently the url has recently been changed. I've corrected it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

I've added the name of the head, and changed back the name of the peeth (pith), since this is what the source says: The source reads "Shree Nrushinhaashrma (Who defected the Brihaspatguru in the debut of scriptures at Patan) The head of the Shreemad Jagatguru Shankaracharya pith." But what is "Shreemad Jagatguru Shankaracharya pith"? Does it mean 'the head of the peeth of Shreemad Jagatguru Shankaracharya', that is, the head of the Dvaraka Peeth? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 10:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

This source, mentioned by Kautilya3, says that "sharada" means is another name for this western matha. My humble apologies; I was clearly wrong here. Only the original link was incorrect. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:35, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Though I don't understand then why the southern matha is called Sringeri Sharada Peetham. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 13:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Ah, bith are called "sharada", which does not mean "western". Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:04, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Sharada means the goddess of learning, i.e., Saraswati. Sharada Peeth = the seat of the goddess of learning, which is essentially a way of saying a centre of learning. - Kautilya3 (talk) 14:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering – I see "Sharda Peeth" twice in the last paragraph of the lead. Is that correct? Corinne (talk) 15:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Template:Od Thanks Kautilya3! There's a disadvantage in not being Indian... @Corinne: the sentences says "Sharda Peeth Vidya Sabha is an educational society sponsored by the Sharda Peeth". So, it's about two dfifferent, though related, institutions. Best regards, Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

O.K. Thanks, but I was just looking at all the mentions of "Sharada", above, and then I saw "Sharda", so I wondered if that were a typographical error, but I guess not. Corinne (talk) 17:14, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Pre-Hindu temples?

3) In the second paragraph of the section Dwarka#Middle Ages to present are the following two sentences:

• During the period of Muslim rule in 1372, the Mughal emperors invaded Dwarka and destroyed its ancient temples. Mahmud Begada destroyed the Hindu temples in 1473 after sacking the city.

If the temples of Dwarka were destroyed in 1372, how could they be destroyed also in 1473. Were the temples rebuilt after 1372, only to be destroyed again, or were some temples destroyed in 1372 and others in 1473? I think this ought to be clarified. Or were the "ancient temples" not Hindu temples, and only the ones destroyed in 1473 were Hindu temples? If so, perhaps it would help to add "pre-Hindu" before "temples" in the first sentence: "and destroyed its ancient pre-Hindu temples". Corinne (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Ancient temples were also Hindu temples at Dwarka. I have made changes inn the first temple as "some ancient temples" and in the second line as "the then existing Hindu temples". Nvvchar. 03:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

What do you think about using the word "remaining"? -- and a slight re-wording:

• In 1473 Mahmud Begada sacked the city and destroyed the remaining Hindu temples.

– Corinne (talk) 03:35, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

• Changed as suggested. Nvvchar. 10:11, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

The 1372 destruction is clearly a hoax because there were no "Mughals" in 1372. Sailendra Nath Sen books are not entirely reliable because he is essentially a Raj era academic, but his books continue to be republished. Even then I don't believe he would have said that Mughals destroyed temples in 1372! - Kautilya3 (talk) 11:52, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Apparently, the hoax has been propagated by the Encyclopedia of Britanica, which is not a reliable source for history as per WP:HISTRS. And, according to this source [3], apparently the "Great Shankaracharya" rebuilt the temple in -- hold your breath -- 346 BC! - Kautilya3 (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Airport

4) In the "Geography" section under Dwarka#Geography and climate, I added "to the rest of India" after "is well connected" because something was needed there, but if you think it should be "to the rest of India and the world", you can add "and the world", but I don't think it's necessary. Corinne (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

There is no international airport at Dwarka. Hence, your correction is fine. Nvvchar. 03:48, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Town

According to the Indian government, urban areas with population below 100,000 are called Towns [4] (archive). This settlement, as per 2011 census (sourced in the article body), has a population of only 38,873. Thus all mention of city in the article should be changed to town. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Template:Ping IPs (possibly the same person) are changing 'town' to 'city' [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] despite explanation regarding census categorization as well as this discussion. Please see if this article can be protected temporarily. Thanks. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Tomorrow. But I’m not sure what most other sources say and it seems to be in some possibly more nor less official lists of cities. Doug Weller talk 18:59, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

In any case, the IPs were all on the same provider, so I've semi-protected the page. Doug Weller talk 16:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Template:Ping Thank you. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Hyperlink of Gomti river incorrect.

"Okhamandal Peninsula on the right bank of the 'Gomti' River".

Hyperlink of Gomti river is incorrect. Its directing to the Gomti river of U.P. 223.231.161.9 (talk) 04:29, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

GAR

{{Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Dwarka/1}}