||Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.
||This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.
WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects 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.
This article is within the scope of ||
||This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
||This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
- Support with caveat. I don't mind the merge as long as the sources are solid (requires verification), but the title of physiology associated with yoga is not valid or supportable, so should not follow the article if the merge is agreed upon. Physiology is an established branch of medicine and a field of basic and clinical science, none of which applies to the sources in the Yoga physiology article. WP:MEDRS sources are required to support effects on physiology (there is none for yoga). Kvng: you did not state your reasons for objecting to my deletion request, so these should be stated here according to WP:DEPROD. --Zefr (talk) 17:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- I deprodded because I didn't see indication that a merge was given ample consideration as an alternative WP:BEFORE proposed deletion. If there is consensus that there is no salvageable material here I will support deletion at WP:AFD. ~Kvng (talk) 15:14, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: Is there really anything relevant - sources or content - in the old version of the Yoga physiology article to merge?! This article already contains a summary under Beliefs section. Are you seeking an AfD-equivalent for the other article? Would retitling it to Sarira (yoga) or something be more appropriate? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Another alternative is to WP:BOLDly WP:REDIRECT Yoga physiology to this article or a subsection of this article. ~Kvng (talk) 20:38, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done NE Ent 23:41, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Irrelevant sentence in 'Reception in the West' section
The third paragraph in this section currently reads: "Australia's Bette Calman is the oldest female yoga teacher at 83 years old. She teaches at the Indian mental and physical discipline of yoga."
This breaks the chronology of the surrounding paragraphs and is also unconnected the section's topic of how yoga has been received and evolved in the West.
Peterlambeth (talk) 10:09, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Not 'ancient India'.
Not 'ancient India'.
May be ancient South Asia, or Asia. Or maybe Central Asia. -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
You might consider scipping the :, as this sign is called visarga in devan?gar? and would therefore be read yoga?. Princ3jah (talk) 02:03, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, my fault, thats indeed how it is written and pronounced in sanskrit Princ3jah (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Yoga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the , on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.
Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
At the summary, it says: "Despite considerable research, there is little scientific evidence that yoga is beneficial for physical health, and it may cause muscular or spinal injuries, although it may improve mental health both for healthy people and for those with illnesses. Clinical studies on the health effects of yoga generally are of poor quality."
What type of Yoga is included here. Not Jnana Yoga I guess... -- Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:801:251:54B5:B8F5:CE35:358A:E9A2 (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Changes of Dec 7
 I'm a bit concerned that we might be pitting MEDRS against FRINGE with these edits. The second diff is so complicated that it's unclear what was actually changed.
For the lede:
Despite considerable research, there is little scientific evidence that yoga is beneficial for physical health, and it may cause muscular or spinal injuries, although it may improve mental health both for healthy people and for those with illnesses. Clinical studies on the health effects of yoga generally are of poor quality.
was replaced with:
Many studies have tried to determine the effectiveness of yoga as a complementary intervention for cancer, schizophrenia, asthma, and heart disease. The results of these studies have been mixed and inconclusive.
- ^ a b * Smith, Kelly B.; Pukall, Caroline F. (May 2009). "An evidence-based review of yoga as a complementary intervention for patients with cancer". Psycho-Oncology. 18 (5): 465-475. doi:10.1002/pon.1411. PMID 18821529.
- ^ a b Vancampfort, D.; Vansteeland, K.; Scheewe, T.; Probst, M.; Knapen, J.; De Herdt, A.; De Hert, M. (July 2012). "Yoga in schizophrenia: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials". Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 126 (1): 12-20. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.2012.01865.x., art.nr. 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2012.01865.x
I'm still trying to figure out what else was changed, and will make some edits to it's more apparent. --Ronz (talk) 21:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Potential benefits for adults
This shows the changes to the section.
The addition of "While some of the medical community regards the results of yoga research as significant, others point to many flaws which undermine results. " to start the section seems to violate both FRINGE and MEDRS.
Likewise in replacing "although there is a generally low quality of research and uncertainty for proving this effect" with "Others have questioned the quality of research and uncertainty in proving this effect." --Ronz (talk) 21:52, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm still trying to determine what changed in this section. --Ronz (talk) 22:04, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Ronz: A few weeks ago the health-related section was apparently changed significantly and I missed the changes. We need to be careful with alleging medical benefits or alleging medical danger. Whatever we summarize, we must rely on WP:MEDRS, avoid primary sources / newspaper columns / non-MEDRS. I reverted the lead summary close to the October version, but trimmed it further. I also recovered some of the old text in the main article, integrated it into the new text that was added. But frankly, I was before and I remain uncomfortable with that section, with the quality of the sources, with the summary, and some the sentences. We need to carefully summarize the MEDRS, and avoid fringe-y/poorly phrased statements which can be inferred to mean 'yoga surely solves whatever problems you have, try it tonight' or 'yoga surely will give you problems you never imagined, don't dare even think about it'. We need to be more careful with 'health information'-related summary, and stick to summarizing the MEDRS. @Doc James: when you have a moment, would you please review the health section(s), guide us a bit. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:13, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- At the moment I'm trying to figure out what you've done with your edits. In the future could you make smaller edits, and be especially careful with complicated edits that span multiple sections?
- Could you provide diffs of the significant changes you mention? --Ronz (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- See this for example. It was a major rewrite of the health-related section a few weeks ago. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- See this.... is Patel's paper primary, or review quality MEDRS? is Daily Mail is MEDRS? etc
- Quote: Torn muscles, knee injuries, and headaches are common ailments which may result from yoga practice.
- I suggest we try to find and focus on summarizing systematic Yoga and Health related review articles published in reputable medical journals, to the best of our abilities. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- So why did you remove the Swain reference and the corresponding content completely from the section? My guess it was accidentally removed. --Ronz (talk) 23:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't remove it 'completely'. I left one mention (please see the first para). I removed what read like repetition without context and cherrypicking. Swain and McGwin conclude, among other things, "While there are many health benefits to practicing yoga, participants and those wishing to become participants should confer with a physician prior to engaging in physical activity and practice only under the guidance of certified instructors". On context, a systematic review would be a better source, one that compares yoga-related injuries to other causes, "with context (i.e. per 10,000 or some basis)". The summary stated, "In one 2016 survey over 13 years conducted in the United States, there were 29,590 yoga-related injuries"; but, then, there were 970,801 weight training-related injuries over 17 years according to Katherine Schreiber and Heather A. Hausenblas. Of course, we can't do OR:Synthesis, but if we must summarize Swain's data, the more NPOV data is to report their per 10,000 data. It states every year between 0.9 to 1.7 person per 10,000 people got injured (Figure 1 etc). Further, is Swain systematic review per our MEDRS guidelines? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. --Ronz (talk) 23:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
I've broken down the changes in the section .
The only thing that stands out to me is the complete removal of the Swain reference from the section, especially in light of the Penman survey being promoted to the first paragraph in the same edit. --Ronz (talk) 23:51, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Swain is mentioned in the subsection above where Penman is (it is cite number 250 right now). The Penman survey summary was also added a few weeks ago, if my memory serves me right. I trimmed it down today, then had second thoughts and put it back somewhere! I just felt uncomfortable about the entire yoga and health section (for reasons, see above). I thought it might be better to request a MEDRS review. Perhaps Doc James or someone with better expertise on health / med topics will join in. Let us give them a few days. Otherwise, we can visit the WP:Medicine clinic! Thanks for opening this discussion BTW, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:43, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Here is a link to review articles from the last 5 years.
Pick the ones from major journals would be useful for updating. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Doc James: Thank you. Exactly what we needed. @Ronz:, others: I urge we replace much of what we have in the Yoga and health section(s) with NPOV summaries from these scholarly reviews. There are so many of them, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2017
||This edit request has been answered. Set the
|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The term "Yoga" is derived from the Sanskrit word "Yuj" which means "to join" or "to unite". It reflects the union of inner consciousness with the Universe consciousness. Ladyshal17 (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
- 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. Terra (talk) 09:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2017
||This edit request has been answered. Set the
|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Finessyoga (talk) 10:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
- 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. DRAGON BOOSTER ? 10:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
I, as an IP, can not edit this protected article. Confirmed/registered editors please add the following (A) file WITH (A) the first text, and (c) also add the 2nd text. Thanks.
Pashupati seal (2350-2000 BCE),, from Indus Valley Civilization shows an early form of the tricephalic or ithyphallic Hindu god Shiva (or Rudra), who is associated with asceticism, yoga, and linga; regarded as a lord of animals; and often depicted as having three eyes.
Yoga is of three types, Karma Yoga - the salvation through good deeds, Bhakti Yoga - the salvation through devotion, and Hatha Yoga salvation through physical practice.
@TerraCodes: and @DRAGON BOOSTER:: May I request you to help with this please. Please peruse and use these edit suggestions from me, if it makes sense to you. Also, I further suggest to merge the "Modern History: reception by western world" with "reception with other religions" into a combined "reception by others" (or some such heading) section. I am using "replyto' (incorrect template?) because I do not know how to call out for help or grab your attention. Thanks.
220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
- Nope. See Pashupati seal, which does not say "shows an early form of the tricephalic or ithyphallic Hindu god Shiva (or Rudra)", but says " It was once thought to be ithyphallic, an interpretation that is now mostly discarded", and "is purported to be one of the earliest depictions of the Hindu god Shiva". It also says "Writing in 2002, Gregory L. Possehl concluded that while it would be appropriate to recognize the figure as a deity, its association with the water buffalo, and its posture as one of ritual discipline, regarding it as a proto-Shiva would "go too far." (Possehl 2002, p.141-144)". Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 21:35, 30 December 2017 (UTC)