User talk:Amitrochates/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

January 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Mandukya Upanishad, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

  • Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
  • ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
  • If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place "{{helpme}}" on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
  • The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Mandukya Upanishad was changed by CorrectKnowledge (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.960476 on 2012-01-02T10:24:30+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 10:24, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Varna (Hinduism)

I think that you should probably self-revert your recent edits at Varna (Hinduism) and take a read of WP:PRIMARY. It looks to me as if you are citing inappropriate sources to support your statements. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

No I am not, the sources are well documented and my comments are not interpretations of those.CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Actually, I see that you are making similar errors in other recently edited articles. Please could you also take a look at WP:Citing sources and WP:OR. I am reverting a few of your edits. - Sitush (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Would you care to explain yourself. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, for example, at U. G. Krishnamurti you added all sorts of statements that are your interpretation of what Krishnamurti meant by what he said. You cannot do that - it is original research, especially given the high level of thinking that is required in philosophy. In addition, your citations were poor and included many comments such as "Derived from ..." which are simply not how we do things here. I am wondering whether you ever received one of our standard "welcome" messages which contain general guidance about matters such as these. However, just in case you did not, much of the same can be found by reading our Five Pillars. You may be an expert on philosophy and/or Hinduism but that does not over-ride the way that we operate here. - Sitush (talk) 19:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
That might have been the case with one reference which btw I haven't undone, but not all. I've quoted Krishnamurti as is. You can read the sources. Just changed direct speech to indirect speech. I used the phrase "derived from", but that doesn't mean I interpreted. Besides, my sources and comments on that page are more credible than anyone else.CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
We are not a dictionary of quotations either. I have taken it to the article talk page. - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30

Hi. When you recently edited Narayana sukta, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Siva (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Admin note

You're skating on very thin ice right now; between your contributions to Varna (Hinduism) and U. G. Krishnamurti, it's becoming apparent that you misunderstand what original research is. Please thoroughly review that policy and hold off on editing those pages until you do. If you continue to take up the time of other editors who have to clean up after your additions, I or another admin will block you for some period of time. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Historical Vedic religion

You have recently added a few references to this article and removed some [citation needed]' template that I added before. I appreciate your good effort in this regard, but at the same time please spare the the [citation needed]' templates where you are unable to find the references. It would prompt somebody having better understanding in the subject or better access to corresponding sources to provide sufficient citataion and improve the article. Please take this request positively. -AshLey Msg 09:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, We have to keep this talk here. Just leave me talkback msg once you reply me; that's the WP practice.(1) We can't rely on a primary source entirely. It should be supported with a secondary source(WP:RS). Especially, Rigveda, Bible, Kuran etc are not used as sources in Wikipedia. Quotes are allowed, but in this case, it appears like an interpretation. See WP:Primary -"Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so." (2)Also you justified that "each ritual can be individually verified at their respective articles". I'm afraid, if it compromises the verifiability and against WP:ILC. If there is a secondary source citing this info, and if someone adds the source seeing this tag, it would improve the quality of article(my personal experience suggests so). That's why I requested you to be positive in tagging such cases. If you have more doubts I could ask the help of someone with more experience to guide us in this case. --AshLey Msg 14:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I do not see any conflict with WP:PSTS in the sentence "there is a late Rigvedic reference invoking forefathers "both cremated (agnidagdhá-) and uncremated (ánagnidagdha-)".(RV 10.15.14)". As, this sentence is not analyzing, interpreting or evaluating anything. There might however be a conflict with WP:SYNTHESIS since, the complete sentence could be advancing a connection between cremation in Cemetery H culture and the Rig Vedic verse. IMO, this connection is not clearly visible and can be ignored or alternatively, you can rephrase the sentence to better represent the content. If a source for the English translation of the verse is required, please let me know. If you still feel this content violates Wikipedia's policies we can take this discussion to the article talk page where other editors (particularly the one(s) who added this content) can contribute to this discussion.CorrectKnowledge (talk) 23:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
What about replacing the current one with a "better source needed" template?
That will not be necessary since I found two secondary references here and here.CorrectKnowledge (talk) 00:51, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hindu views on monotheism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Devas and Pada
Cārvāka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Sutras

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:42, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Narayana sukta

I realise that you think you are in the right at Narayana sukta and that you have initiated a discussion but please be aware of the three revert rule and, more generally, edit warring. It is obvious from the edit summaries that the IP is the registered user, contributing while logged out. You probably should not have reverted them immediately after starting the discussion because it rather undermines the impression that the thread was a genuine attempt to obtain agreement/consensus.

If the IP/user persists in reverting then you can raise a report at WP:3RRNB because I am about to explain the 3RR etc rule to them now. - Sitush (talk) 16:38, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I reverted the edit because I thought that the editor would ignore the discussion otherwise. I realize that this was a poor way of getting his/her attention. Will keep that in mind in the future. Thanks. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 17:16, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
No problem. I've done the same thing myself in the past. One possible way round the "would ignore otherwise" situation is to drop a neutrally worded note on their talk page if they do not respond at article talk - just tell them that the article talk page thread exists. If they still do not respond then you can revert if there are no other participants and your stuff is sourced etc. Obviously, if it was a copyright violation or some breach of WP:BLP then you cannot wait long - seek advice if you are unsure of how to approach it in such cases. - Sitush (talk) 06:25, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

New Message in Bhagavad Gita page!

Hello, you have at least one new message in Talk:Bhagavad Gita --Tito Dutta ✉ 09:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

And once again! --Tito Dutta ✉ 09:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I have replied in my talk page, --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I have replied again in my talk... --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Once again! --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I have replied there! --Tito Dutta ✉ 06:50, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I have added a tool link above, that might be useful if you are writing references manually. http://reftag.appspot.com/ remember to remove accessdate and <ref></ref> tags! --Tito Dutta ✉ 09:22, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I do not about these two publishers very much --Tito Dutta ✉ 10:53, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
I have posted a comment there! --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Appreciate it

You and I had a somewhat rocky start but I keep seeing bits of your more recent contributions floating across my voluminous watchlist etc and, well, they are appreciated. I don't want to sound patronising etc but you really have improved greatly and it is nice to see. Onwards and upwards! - Sitush (talk) 11:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Honestly, I had decided to quit Wikipedia after the rocky start. Not because I was upset or dejected, but because once I found out OR wasn't allowed, I didn't think there was anything left for me to contribute. What you said here made me change my mind and I am very grateful for that. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 13:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Heads up 2

At least one message has been posted in Bhagavad Gita talk page! I am not feeling well for last few days, I am not sure if I'll able to continue there, I'll try. --Tito Dutta ✉ 13:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

If you are unwell, don't bother with the discussion. It doesn't look like this discussion is heading anywhere anytime soon. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 13:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
At least one new message here: Talk:Bhagavad_Gita#Sources_section_02 --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
I have replied in 700 thread! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

SPI closed

I see that - rightly - the SPI has been closed for lack of evidence/ambiguity. It was a rather silly accusation from someone who, frankly, seems incapable of grasping how we work here. Put it behind you, and have a good weekend (I am away for a couple of days). - Sitush (talk) 17:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Well seeing how the BG thing has gone down, I'll be away from Wikipedia too, for a couple of days. Thanks for your help with the SPI. Hope you have a fun weekend too. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 17:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Gita

Why don't you put this on the talk page? — goethean ॐ 18:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought it would be better if other editors trying to edit that page could see the problems with it. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:16, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser

Congrats, you have got access to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser. See Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

That was fast, I'll try it day after tomorrow. Have to leave now. Cheers. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Heads Up 3

It was GA once, but, since I work as GA reviewer if it is nominated now– I'll speedy fail it– many reasons– too short lead, maintenance template, fmt errors etc! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I have started making some changes, I'll get back to it shortly with rationale etc! --Tito Dutta ✉ 10:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
New reply in barnstar talk! --Tito Dutta ✉ 12:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
New message in that page! --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:02, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
New reply here: Talk:Bhagavad_Gita#Barnstar.21 --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
New message! --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
You can work in your sandbox, add Krishna's image (don't use that Arnab Datt's image) and then post in talk, You'll fins some sample barnstar's code here: User:Titodutta/Awards --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:49, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I have made some more changes and removed one image from the barnstar! I have using an aplication in my Linux OS (can be done using GIMP etc too). Most probably they have online app too, if you want I'll try to find so that you can also create these.
I think it'll be awesome if we can add a quote, for example 2/20 of Gita in a collapsed box at right side of the barnstar! --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:59, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
And change Krishna's image with something which covers face of Krishna. Actually this trick is used while selecting profile photo (Facebook, Google Plus etc), see this --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
No, see the file, in the description it is written, you can remix, actually you can remix 99% percent of files of commons, make sure to add the word "cropped" after the name, it'll be excellent if you add the word crop after original file name– Sri Mariamman Temple Singapore 2 amk cropped.jpg after uploading give me the URL< I'll see if something needs to be done! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Some minor corrections need to be done in that image, let me do that first, or can you do it yourself– for example, 1) it is not your source, source is the main file in Commons File:Sri Mariamman Temple Singapore 2 amk.jpg, add this code in source [[:File:Sri Mariamman Temple Singapore 2 amk.jpg]], in description also write, you took the photo from Commons and cropped, also add category "Krishna" --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:36, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Which operating system you are using? --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Vista. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:44, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
You have almost 2000 edits. You can apply for Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser, add your name here: Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:47, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, I've added my name there. Btw, I am still struggling with the collapsable box. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
And I am struggling with my slow internet! I have found this image, see how do you like it, we can crop out the frame etc! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Its difficult to say whether this will look good on a yellow background. Our previous Krishna image was blue and therefore had a nice contrast. We can give it a shot. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:04, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I am struggling with slow internet, If you have fast internet, in my commons user page there are some tools added to find free image, if those images are not in Commons still, you can upload, see user page commons:User:Titodutta. And about quotebox, no, not very impressive, I mean the quotebox, not the quote! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
This is the only decent image I could find using google/flickr tools from your userpage. What's wrong with the quotebox size,colour or just the idea? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:28, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
No, no Radha please! Only Krishna, and if possible shishu (child) Krishna! But, I'll personally try to avoid Radha in the image for some own view, Radha and Gopini are always misunderstood and misinterpreted (SwamiVivekanda told somewhere, I need to find, but, I agree). And quotebox, I'll see what I can do. Shall I try to add animation in your Krishnaa's image? --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I have tried to animate it, but, I can't upload on that file since file extension don't match, see the image here --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
The image looks good, but perhaps the animation won't make much of a difference in 100px. We can leave it like this. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
What's about this one. Looks better, download the image and upload in Commons if you like it! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I couldn't respond earlier. The new image looks perfect for our purposes. I see that you've made some changes to the barnstar in your sandbox. The blue background looks better than the yellow one, so retain the current sandbox version. I'll be able to help with the barnstar and the article only tomorrow. I am hoping we can push the article for a GA status one of these days. Till tomorrow then. Cheers. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
The image is uploaded, don't re-upload. You can see this discussion too Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Krishna.gif and User:Titodutta/sandbox --Tito Dutta ✉ 13:49, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
User:Titodutta/sandbox Please continue with the barsntar and post the final draft in article's talk page! I have replied in my talk!--Tito Dutta ✉ 14:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
POV, WP:RS, removing some commentaries, WP:ALT, manual formatting checking etc etc– there are many issues. We can discuss and solve one by one! --Tito Dutta ✉ 14:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I have added the alt tags, but I guess, the other issues remain. About the barnstar, looks like you've dropped the quotebox idea. What else do you want to be added there, a title? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 14:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I have removed od from your post, actually I am curious to see how far we can go without using od (in Wikicreole). Well, you can add collpased quote, but, it is not looking very good, I think. You can add it. I can not understand what do you mean by title. Also, another important question is where we are going to place the code?--Tito Dutta ✉ 14:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
By title, I meant something like "the Karma yogi award" or "the Bhagavad Gita barnstar". The quotebox didn't look very good the last time around. So I think its best to leave it out. The barnstar looks good as it is. The quotebox will only clutter it. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 14:47, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, add a suitable title! --Tito Dutta ✉ 14:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Great! You can try another font (should not be OS dependent) and font style in tile!--Tito Dutta ✉ 15:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I have tried a few of font families. Verdana looks the best. If you don't like this we can go back to the default font. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks good, Though I am not sure I am seeing it properly. I can not see most of the Micro$oft fonts in my computer, I just see plain text! Where we are gonna place the code? --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I reverted the edit because the font wasn't probably OS neutral. Which code are we talking about? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The code of the barnstar! Where we are going to put the code? --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:32, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I thought the barnstar was to motivate new editors on the Bhagavad Gita/Krishna/Vishnu/Hinduism namespace. Where else can we place it other than talk pages of other users? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, but are we going to copy paste the whole code manually every time? This can be placed in WP:PUA in other topics barnstars, if we make some changes! --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:39, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Lets place it in Wikipedia:Personal_user_awards/Topics. Only the image has to be placed there. No code is required. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
No, we can create a separate page for it– like Template:The Karma Yogi Barnstar if it is approved. You need to suggest it here Wikipedia_talk:Barnstars, remove that line "Contribution to Bhagavad Gita" and we may need try to make it a little bit more universal! --Tito Dutta ✉ 15:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The WikiProject Wikipedia Awards are used to promote civility and wiki-love. I think it will be very difficult to generalize this barnstar enough to get it passed there. I still think we should go with the Wikipedia:Personal_user_awards/Topics. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 15:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
You can use od in next post! Yes, go ahead and suggest it in Wikipedia_talk:Barnstars! Mention PUA and scope– articles related Krishna, Bhagavad Gita etc etc! --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Do we need to suggest it. Can't we add it directly to the PUA? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 16:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK, a general barnstar should be suggested first! --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

We are looking to make a PUA, The Karma Yoga Barnstar, which is awarded to users, who have made significant contributions to Krishna-related articles. Does this need to be discussed at the talk page or can we just add the image and description on the Wikipedia:Personal_user_awards/Topics? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 16:24, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure, [[WP:BARN}} asks to suggest first, but since it is just a PUA, you can go ahead! --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Heads up 4

Where is the Template page? --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

We can create a Template:The Karma Yogi Barnstar or you can add the code to a subpage in your namespace and I'll link it in the PUA. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
No, not, not personal subpage! You can see codes of current barnstars at WP:BARN to create a new template! --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:05, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Excellent work! Really! Don't award it to anyone now before checking it for the final time. I am not sure how this user got the barnstar already User talk:Uncle uncle uncle! Anyway, can you please modify Template:Panipuri in the same way, this was awarded by Barnstar team but I messed up some codes there, so did not add in PUA. If you can modify the code, please add it in personal user award or other user award --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I can not find the doc page from where it is claimed to being transcluded! --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Much better! Can you change whole code as we have in Karma Yogi barnstar? And will you give me Karma Yogi doc page link as it is in Template:Panipuri/doc --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:27, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Karma Yogi barnstar is using existing documentation. It does not have its own yet. Is there a need to create one? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I have cleaned both the Panipuri template and the documentation of unnecessary code. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
See at the bottom of Template:The Karma Yogi Barnstar it says– This documentation is transcluded from Template:Barnstar documentation. which might be confusing! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
That is the standard documentation of all barnstars. Don't worry it won't confuse anyone. The standardization nullifies the need to create a new page for documentation. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, but still it is confusing– first we are saying use {{subst:The Karma Yogi Barnstar}}. and then we are saying To use this template, add {{subst:The Karma Yogi Barnstar|1=Put your message here. ~~~~}} --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Brilliant! Really I need to do some home works on barnstar template code! What do you think of this template: Template:Read (feel free to make changes) --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:55, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, eye I have read the above message. I will reply when I have a moment. really! Do we need to include– 1) Hello 2) "your" 3) Is the image okay? 4) any idea to make it more catchy and universal? --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:00, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Simple "I have read your last post" will do. I have updated the documentation for this template. The image is alright. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Heads up 5

We can make a list who can get KY barnstar! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:09, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Do you have speaker in your computer which can play sound? --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:10, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Which one– list or speaker? I have very slow net now (will going to face this till 10th of next month), getting disconnected every now and then. You can watch this video. I found it highly interesting! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:29, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Lets make the list and I have speakers. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Wow, she has memorized the whole thing. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, that girl (Naina) was reciting very well. And yes for list! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:46, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
What is our criteria for this list: number of edits on article page, talk page or something entirely different. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
You can decide/choose! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:59, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay first, what is the purpose of the barnstar- to motivate new editors or to reward genuine contribution? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:01, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Reward/Acknowledgement first, then motivation (if needed)! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:02, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
In that case, we should simply go by the number of edits in the article page. But, rewards would only make sense if as a result of the editors contribution the article achieved something. For instance, if the article stays a B/C-class article, why is any editor getting rewarded for it? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The article has a long history, it was a GA. Have you seen ISKCON conflicts? There were few edit wars on ISCKON materials, some people used to add all ISCKON content, and some people used to remove all ISCKON content, you may find some post in Bhagavada Gita talk page. The worst part of is I never understood anything what these people tried to say– see this and this. At that time they deleted at least 5,000 characters from the article which has never been recovered correctly! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Lets make a list of what the article requires now, to be promoted to a GA status again. If more content/sources need to be added that is not an issue. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
See this, I lost my track for few days at that time. We have not met that type of editor in Gita article for last 1–2 month(s), or it'll be same again! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The edits removed were written in a spiritual/religious style and don't seem good enough for wikipedia. Besides, borrowing so much from a single source would have lead to NPOV issues. I think we are better off now. Our content seems more neutral and wikified. Lets work with what we have. What do you think is still required to make this article GAR worthy? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Will see in next few days! Have a look at this article Swami Vivekananda– how do you like it? --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The article is extremely detailed and written with great care. The first section has an issue with referencing. Otherwise the article seems very good, I was surprised to see it failed the GAR. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
The Lead section is summary of the article, whatever it is written in lead is written in details in main body with WP:RS. I have my most number of edits in that article (most probably 330 or something). But, the thing I want to mention is the article has recently failed in GA review (ooo hooo, I am very sad, really! I took a short wikibreak (in disappointment) when that article failed), because of only one point– close paraphrasing. GA reviiew is always unpredictable, sometimes some bogus articles get passed, sometimes if you have a tough reviewer,, a very good article might fail too! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
What I meant when I said there was a problem with referencing is that the "Birth and childhood" section seems to contain the Harvnb style without parentheses or reftags. I know the lead does not require to be referenced again unless the claim is controversial. Close paraphrasing... aren't their tools to check that? Unfortunate... how long till you can put it up for review again? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
There was only close paraphrasing issues, that's also suspected. You can add CN tags in that article, I'll add citations. There is not any time restriction, it can be renominated! Back to talk Gita! --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Can you tell me what exactly is lacking in the BG article. I see a few copy-edit issues, but other than that it seems okay for a GAR. I mean, even if there are other minor issues, I am sure they can be corrected during the process. Do you see any major issues involving WP:V, WP:NPOV in the article. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 21:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Problems with the Bhagavad Gita article

Ya, lots of issues. I know simply nothing of Wikipedia editing, evemn I can find multiple issues. We can discuss in article's talk page! Here is a short list–

  • Dating sections and other section where wikilink not added there descriptor needed for scholars, researchers other wise I see no reason to listen to Fowler or Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, since from a general reader's point of view I don't know who are they etc!
  • Many scholars and researchers interpret the story of the Gita – not the best way to start! Many scholars – who? And the two examples added in that portion, Nikhilananda and Gandhi– are they scholars?
  • We have mixed up Aurobindo and Sri Aurobindo (also it should be linked in the fist instance only).
  • I disline the translation in header Karma yoga: Action
  • Bhagavad Gita.org refs should be removed

And many more! --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:26, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Aurobindo is called Sri Aurobindo in the first instance only, in the body of the article (in references he is called both). Also Bhagavad Gita.org is probably more reliable than other links in the page simply because the content there is published by a trust, as opposed to say vedicbooks.net. I have changed the title of the section on karma yoga. Let me find descriptors for the authors CorrectKnowledge (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I think we should take this to the article talk page so that the other editors can also be aware of the problems with this article. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 21:52, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya! --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Message of July 26

Please add needed tags in Swami Vivekananda article!--Tito Dutta ✉ 21:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood what I said. In the sentence, "Narendra's grandfather Durga Charan Datta renounced the world and became a monk at the age of twenty five.Banhatti 1995, p. 1His father Vishwanath Datta..." do you notice the style of referencing, Banhatti 1995, p.1. There are no parentheses or ref tags, there isn't even a space between page no. and the next sentence. This style is used in the section on "Birth and Childhood". It probably needs some correction. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 21:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! The section was completely broken with all open refs. After GA failing I became too lazy and did not monitor IP edits. There was not any problem when the article was nominated, I have made some changes! --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you in any kind of hurry? --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:06, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Today I'll be on and off wikipedia, but no hurry. If you were referring to GAR, then yes I want BG article there as qucikly as possible. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Please posts TB in my talkpage after replying or bring this talk to my talk page for sometime. I have just come online today, with a full list of watchlist, many unattended emails I can not not understand what to do! I also I have started lagging, just now I clicked on "My contribution" to check "My watchlist" :-/ --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:39, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Please don't start Peer right now! W can make a list first! --Tito Dutta ✉ 16:53, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Good work!

Doing good work. Carry on! But also if needed! --Tito Dutta ✉ 17:55, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The Karma Yogi Barnstar
For your works in Bhagavad Gita article. Tito Dutta ✉ 17:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for my first barnstar. Your timing could not be better, I have just completed my work on references in the Bhagavad Gita article. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:00, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Reply in the peer review page! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:04, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
I have replied there as well. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Ya, okay, hope someone will catch it soon before my break! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
When are you going to take the wiki-break? CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Have not decided yet! I'll try to attend the GA review at least! --Tito Dutta ✉ 18:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Try and take the wiki-break after the GAR, although it might be long. The GA reviews have a huge backlog. Unfortunate that Redtigerxyz can't take part in it. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 18:58, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
See you at the GAR then. Hopefully, it will be soon. If its missing you will know where to find it. ;) CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:50, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Are you doing job or student or retired? --Tito Dutta ✉ 21:49, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
I could have gone by my real name on wikipedia and added a lot of people here on facebook, but I don't. Lets just say, that for some reason, I don't connect my various identities on the web to each other or with real life. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 22:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Thigle

Please put me in the picture! --Tito Dutta ✉ 23:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I mean, please give me some details! --Tito Dutta ✉ 23:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
My reasoning is at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Thigle. I basically suspect that BrahmanAdvaita and a couple of others are sockpuppets of Thigle. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 23:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Do you remember that in an earlier post you had showed me the diffs of AssociateLong on the BG page. He is also a sockpuppet of Thigle. While, reviewing a few archived conversations of the article the similarities between BA and AssociateLong struck me. I investigated a bit further and came to the conclusions given in the link above. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 00:08, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
I did not suspect it. Given a heads up! Will wait to see the result! --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
It is up to the CheckUser now. Admin Dennis Brown has already endorsed it. If he is not Thigle, he need not worry. IP investigations will show nothing. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 00:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amitrochates. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Uttar Pradesh/archive1.
Message added 20:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 20:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amitrochates. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Uttar Pradesh/archive1.
Message added 09:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 09:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

GA review

I have watchlisted it, but, I am surprised he has not failed the article still. You understand neither GA nor Peer. --Tito Dutta ✉ 12:15, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Tito Dutta. I've been a bit busy in RL and was going to formally review (and fail) the article today, but, judging by the substantial changes the article's been undergoing in the recent days, and how far it still is from the GA standards on a few counts, stability and sources among them, I'd suggest that you withdraw the nomination on your own and work on it some more before you nominate it again. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 04:39, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
To explain my last comment– it is expected the editors who have not contributed in an article will comment in peer review! You asked me to comment there, but I am a primary contributor! I think you have wrongly judged my waiting of 4 days before posting anything in peer review page! Actually I was waiting for other people's comments! And right after starting peer review you started talking about GA review!
Cinosaur, please explain how does the article fail in GA criteria 5 (stability)? --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:07, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
WP:WIAGA stipulates that a GAN should be "Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute." Formally speaking, there is no edit warring or heated content disputes at hand, but the very fact that ever since it was nominated for GA, the article changed this much, to my mind means that the main editors are yet to settle on what they see as the article's content and structure, and while the article is in such a flux, it cannot be considered stable. However, as I said, I will happily review the article it the nominator decides it won't hurt to put it through yet another GA fail. Regards, Cinosaur (talk) 07:19, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I reviewed an article Talk:Barack Obama on Twitter which has been one of the most controversial articles in Wikipedia with article for deletion nomination twice, move (multiple times), full protection, semi protection and many more things– a complete headache package. Though the article has been moved to a new title now or content has been radically changed etc, the article is still a good article following the old review. You can see another similar discussion where an editor has stressed on really serious, prolonged content disputes. So, in my humble opinion, the Bhagavad Gita article is not unstable currently, all edits are mainly related to section rearranging which have been done following GA review comments! --Tito Dutta ✉ 07:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Any comments regarding the GAR of the article on Bhagavad Gita should be posted here.
Tito, you have misconstrued my eagerness and intentions behind taking the article to GAR. The peer review was an epic failure by any standards, in the sense that no one turned up despite the fact that I had informed quite a few editors about it. Barring the lone comment by Dwaipayanc, which btw was very helpful, the GAR has been equally dull. I know the Peer/GA reviews were not intended for you. In fact, it would be totally pointless for you to post errors that you saw on the page on a review page when you could just as easily correct them yourself. I was so eager for feedback because I wanted the article to be in the best shape possible before Janmashtami. I had hoped to see a swarm of reviews, sadly that didn't happen. In any case, we did the best we could. GA status or no GA status the article is in a far better shape than it was before Adellefrank started editing it. Looking at where the GAR is heading, I think now might be a good time to take that wiki-break you were talking about. Regards. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Race against time

Interested in race against time? I'll quickly point out all the mistakes in the article I'll find in the article, try to solve those quickly! If interested create a new section in article talk page (not GA review page and let me know in my talk page! If you I don't get any reply I'll shut down computer after next 30 minutes!--Tito Dutta ✉ 19:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Or on a second thought, we can let the GA review finish normally! All's Well That Ends Well All's Bad That Ends Bad --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm in. I'll get back to you shortly. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Amitrochates. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Uttar Pradesh/archive1.
Message added 14:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks,So now i should close review or wait for other editors to respond.Though i've notified them that i've solvd all the issues raised by them. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS☣ 14:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The peer review is still going on, so my comment on this would be superfluous. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:Bhagavad Gita/Quickview

Talk:Bhagavad Gita/Quickview, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Bhagavad Gita/Quickview and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Bhagavad Gita/Quickview during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Tito Dutta ✉ 19:45, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Important New Message!

You have important new message in my talk page! --Tito Dutta ✉ 19:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Replied there. CorrectKnowledge (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
If you have questions, please ask. Right now, you are doing completely unpredictable work. no username or password or name or sign up or anything will be required)!
Got disconnected! Will be in that page in next 1 minute! --Tito Dutta ✉ 20:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

On copyedit changes in Bhagavat Gita

  1. essence of self-->do as you feel necessary
  2. Removal of also: In that case, tell something like this, "While the Upanishads largely upholds such a monistic viewpoint of liberation, the Bhagavad Gita emphasises the dualistic and theistic aspects of moksha in addition to the monistic path"
  3. Citation--ok.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:29, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

New messages....

Hello, Amitrochates. You have new messages at Tamravidhir's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tamravidhir(২০১২) 16:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Your recent Kerala edits

Greetings! I believe you have heard of me and seen my edits before. This is to initiate contact with you as well as to bring to your notice a point that I feel is not very right with your recent edits on the Kerala article. The few minor rectifications you have made, I feel, almost render my additions and references redundant. You see, my point was the drive home the fact that the MP and Vamana-Mahabali legends are eons older, if anything, than the Parasurama legend, something that a few editors are not going to like.

I am on the same page as you are as regards where Ashley comes from (in case you did put that down in the Talk page in a normal mood). While in a more realistic sense, it is that other minority group in Kerala that I have more apprehensions about, and actually detest, this group, while they have produced some incredible individuals - musicians, entrepreneurs, scientists, bureaucrats, etc, and I for a moment would not doubt their patriotism and qualities, the section of them that hails from Kerala, have always tried to put down the the state's relevance in Hinduism.

There is a guy called Menachery who authored an article titled "Hinduism older than Christianity" (You just have to search in Google). Another, some Ninan, ratchets it up a couple of notches by saying that Hinduism even originated from Christianity (Look in Google Books).

Anyway, my point here is that, my last two edits clearly showed that the MP is the oldest, or at the very least one of the three oldest of all the Puranas (Mahapuranas, Upapuranas, et al). And the references are very valid and reliable. I wish you would make further alterations so as to make my point more obvious. TIA and hope to stay in touch.

SumerianPrince (talk) 16:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I am not going to elaborate on AGF, but it is a fundamental principle here and it helps reach consensus. As for the fringe theorists, every religion/culture/nation has them (just google Ishwar Sharan, you'll see what I mean). A simple solution to the issue you have with how Hindu texts are dated is to add dates (with references of course) ahead of each of the texts/myths mentioned in the section. I have recently dated a few Puranas (including Matsya) in the Puranas#Origins section using Wendy Doniger as the source. You can borrow from there or you can add your own dates and references. Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 17:47, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Amitrochates/Archive_1&oldid=1142847575"