Sanskrit was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan 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.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bangladesh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bangladesh 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.BangladeshWikipedia:WikiProject BangladeshTemplate:WikiProject BangladeshBangladesh
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
This article is substantially duplicated in one or more external publications. Since these publication(s) copied Wikipedia, rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Correct to include that sanskrit is the oldest language in india history. The language was started by fisher men in the south of india with very little money invested. They learned to speak in tongues which they ascended to call sankskrit. The style of text originates from forms of unique fishing poles. The uniqueness of the poles was do to warped trees that were carved into long cylindrical sticks that were uneven. They recieved a message from a god and that god told them the poles were uneven perfect and that was the beginning of language phoneticated. Phonetically they heard a whisper not a yell. They were afraid and yelled and the voice vanished from their ears. They did not know what to think. But they knew the poles were magically due to relation and they felt they knew the voice was talking to the poles. The poles led them to the water where they became fisher men, last name fisher men. first name uneven perfect. The language was spoken there after. The language was made up of u, n, e, v, e folling v, n, pi, r, fe, c, t. Before thish the only word they knew was fisher man. That interaction with what who when was the first time what they called each other changed from fisher man to fisher men, which is why they consider the e to be hollpi, because they holl'ed. The grunts and pains and turmoils and good and good and good and bad and bad and bad that they uttered became apart of the language. Money was called holl.As a note they recieved some money from where they got it from. old and good. Zerojackson101 (talk) 01:14, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Currently the section about accent only talks about the Vedic accent and its disappearance, but since it was replaced with a stress accent, surely Classical Sanskrit also had, and has, to be pronounced with stress on some syllable in the word? Even if we don't know what the rule was at the time of Panini, at least we can know how modern Indians and modern Western scholars pronounce it. I remember that I've encountered mentions of some weight-sensitive rule similar to the Latin one; even if it is questionable for some reason, it is better for the article to give some information on the issue - maybe to explain that it is just a convention and not a historical reconstruction, if that is the case - than to just say nothing at all about it. ~2025-43840-74 (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A source that can be used:
Masica, Colin. 1991. The Indo-Aryan Languages. CUP. P. 183:
'Among the other factors that need to be considered is the new Latin-like stress system referred to earlier. Although it came to characterize Classical Sanskrit, it may be considered a MIA development. Briefly, the new stress fell on the first long syllable, up to the fourth from the end, starting with and going backwards from the penult. In other words, it never fell on the final syllable, whereas the Vedic accent frequently did so.'--~2026-51230-3 (talk) 16:40, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that the article contains the word saṃgharṣhī, which appears to be intended as a term referring to a fricative. However, after checking several dictionaries, I suspect this may be a typographical error and that the correct form should be saṃgharṣī. As I am not able to edit semi‑protected articles, I would be grateful if an editor with the appropriate permissions could review this point and make any necessary corrections. Kohej (talk) 01:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the following sentence, which previously started off the "decline" section:
"Indian authors such as M Ramakrishnan Nair state that Sanskrit was a dead language by the 1st millennium BCE.[1]"
The source does indeed say that Sanskrit was a "dead language" by the time of Buddha, while Pali was not. Unfortunately, this statement contradicts the rest of the section, and thus creates more confusion than clarity, especially when the very next sentence is "The decline of Sanskrit began in the 13th century." I imagine the problem here might be differing definitions of "dead language." If anyone wants to add this back in with context that clarifies its relation to the rest of the section, feel free to do so.
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NotJamestack (talk) 01:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
The redirect Neo-Sanskrit has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 25 § Neo-Sanskrit until a consensus is reached. Asteramellus (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2026 (UTC)