If OP uses the tag does it automatically indicate to the audience that OP only wants answers from a historical perspective?


  1. If OP wants to know the (biological) father of a certain king, the answer cannot be Indra, Brahmā, Agni, etc. even if a certain Purāṇa says so.

    • Agree/Disagree?
  2. Answer to Why River Sarasvatī cannot be seen flowing today (where the historical context is implicit) cannot be of the form 'King XYZ did tapasyā (penance) one day and swallowed the whole river causing it to disappear'.

    • Agree/Disagree?

Can we agree on the implicit meaning of the tag and update the tag wiki to be more specific than For questions about the history of Hinduism?

  • I'm of the general view that a tag does not indicate what kind of answers are allowed. If you want a particular kind of answer, you should state so in the question explicitly. Tags are a way to classify questions to make them easier to search for and the like, they don't change the nature of what is asked. – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 0:03
  • In any case, I think the history tag is better suited to questions about the history of Hinduism, i.e. the history of Hindu concepts, the history of Hindu customs, the history of sects of Hinduism, etc. rather than about "historical events" that happen to involve Hindus. – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 0:10
  • Another worth noting is that many Hindus, myself included, believe that Hindu scriptures are accurate historical records of events which really happened. And if they happen to mention supernatural events, that's because supernatural events really happened. Sometimes humans are the sons of Devas, even if it contradicts modern Western beliefs about what's possible. If you want to exclude such things, the way to do it is not through the magical power of a tag, but through phrasing the question, e.g. "What do secular historians believe about when the Ganga started being considered holy?" – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 0:12
  • 'In any case, I think the history tag is better suited to questions about the history of Hinduism...rather than about historical events' - I've no problem with that. Please write an answer, let users vote and make it official. 'secular historians' - 'history' itself means secular account of facts. If this site wants to adopt a new definition, again, let's define it and make it official so everyone is on the same page. @KeshavSrinivasan – Say No To Censorship May 12 '18 at 4:18
  • History does not mean a secular account of events, it means an accurate account of events. The fact that a historical account does not match the beliefs of an atheistic worldview does not diminish the historicity of the events involved. But that's irrelevant. The more salient point is, putting a tag on a question does not put limits on the kinds of answers that are allowed. If you're looking for a particular kind of answer, you should say that in the title or body of the question. – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 4:23
  • The rest of the world believes secular account of history is also the most accurate. Like I said, let's define the tag wiki properly and avoid confusion over its usage on this site. – Say No To Censorship May 12 '18 at 5:13
  • Atheists believe that only secular accounts of history are correct. Evangelical Christians believe Noah's ark really happened. Different people believe different things. In any case, I told you my opinion of how the tag should be defined (i.e. the way it's already defined), but regardless of how the tag is defined, the kind of answer a person is looking for should be specified in the question and not in the tag. Allots of people don't even look at tags. – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 5:17
  • Not just atheists, most theists working in the government world over. "people don't even look at tags" - that's not a good excuse to not define a tag properly. – Say No To Censorship May 12 '18 at 5:26
  • Why do you say "theists working in the government"? Why are you only considering people in the government? I was talking about evangelical Christians in general, not just in the government. In any case, I'm not saying we shouldn't define the tag properly, I'm just saying how we define the tag doesn't restrict what answers are allowed. And also our argument about whether scriptural history or secular history is more accurate has nothing to do with how the tag should be defined. Either the tag should be about history of Hinduism, or it should be about history involving Hindus. – Keshav Srinivasan Mod May 12 '18 at 5:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .