User talk:Freedom skies/Archive 3

Bodhidharma

 * "He was a Brahman by birth, the third child of King Sugandha, was a member of the Kshatriya or warrior caste, and had his childhood in Conjeeveram (also Kanchipuram or Kancheepuram)"


 * "A monk named Bodhidharma went from Kanchipuram to China and took Buddhist ideas with him.* Chinese culture is based on our tantra and our shastras." - From interview with the Kanchi Shankaracharya

Hope you got something out of these refs. Bakaman  Bakatalk 16:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Sound of the One Hand - Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 107, No. 1 (Jan. - Mar., 1987), pp. 125-126

 Bakaman  Bakatalk 17:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

look
look, i've left that crazy and biased article that you wrote on "indian influence on chinese martial arts" alone but if you continue to edit war on the article that JFD and I have written, i will start to seriously edit that biased article of yours- you and i along with everyone who has seen your article considers the one that you have written to be extremely POV. Kennethtennyson 22:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Does Ken mean the well-sourced version ? (Is got more sources than most FA's lol). Bakaman  Bakatalk 03:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Indian influence on Chinese martial arts
Your recent edit to Indian influence on Chinese martial arts (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 03:10, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

William Dalrymple (historian)
I have removed material from that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.--Docg 14:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ayyavazhi
Some members are hell-bent on including Ayyavazhi in the Dharmic religions article. I have myself deleted it a couple of times, but this group props it up again. I don't think its even a religion, but just a small cult. Do you think Ayyavazhi deserves mention as a Dharmic religion ? Please let me know your views. Indian Air Force (IAF)

But Ayyavazhi is too small (even smaller than Osho and ISKCON) and too recent (Sufism is older) to be called a religion. A religion either encompasses a significant majority of the global population and/or has withstood the test of time (like Zoroastrianism).

Ayyavazhi is neither. I seriously think its an attempt to create a separate identity by forming an artificial "religion", in reality its only a cult.

Its the same debate whether Pluto is an asteroid or a planet.

Anyways I respect your opinion. Thanks. Indian Air Force(IAF)

Signpost updated for November 27th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 01:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you ...
Thank you for the barnstar you gave me, as well as for the compliments with which it was accompanied. I appreciate it. Cheers. —Saposcat 15:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I echo those comments! Best wishes --MichaelMaggs 15:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd also like to give a big thank you to Freedom skies for the barnstar you gave me. Take care. Jagged 85 05:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I've awarded four people with barnstars till date and three of them respond in the same post!

Jagged 85: I appreciate your extensive, extensive contributions regarding articles related to Indian martial arts including the main article itself, my friend. You found citations and went to lengths that I could honestly not reach in the past but wil make every attempt to learn from your excellent contributions and better myself as an editor in the future. Your contributions are much appreciated by this editor.

MichaelMaggs: If anyone deserves the Barnstar of good humor it's you, my friend. You were the very voice of reason in the process of finding a solution to Bodhidharma. I cannot imagine the process without your contributions and involvement. You also diffused tensions and worked towards ending conflict, with great sucsess. This member of the Wikipedia community is deeply appreiciative.

Saposcat: In the middle of a tiring discussion on Bodhidharma, an editor appears and proposes paragraphs which are not only the part of the solution but are the solution. The editor says "Cheers" and his very opening words lighten up the mood. The editor works extensively on the article and creates a universally acceptable version. I truly am grateful for your contributions, my friend.

Freedom skies 08:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

How come you never at Hinduism? We need people like you.
--D-Boy 06:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks from Vishal1976
Thanks for useing the image. I have lots of images of Maratha wrestlers, but by mistakes they are wrongly scanned. Allthough they are important and i will post it on wikipedia. I will try to post it soon. Please use it and edit it. Thanks -- Vishal1976 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vishal1976 (talk • contribs).

Signpost updated for December 4th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Decline of Buddhism in India -> History of Buddhism in India
Currently, the latter is a redirect to the former. "Decline" sounds more POV and less encyclopedic than "History." In addition, if the name was changed, then the whole history of Buddhism in India can be talked about, which includes than modern revival rather than just the decline. What do you think? GizzaChat  &#169; 07:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good luck on trying to improve the article. I myself have no deep knowledge of Buddhism unfortunately so I doubt that I'll be much help. I just noticed that the article was in a shocking state. Thanks for your birthday greeting too. Its time to get Wikidrunk, whatever that is! GizzaChat  &#169; 08:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi again. Another Indian Buddhist article has been formed. See this. GizzaChat  &#169; 06:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 11th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

History of Buddhism in India
By the way, where did the text that you added in this edit come from?&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!) 06:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The article itself looks fine. It's just that, when you use material from other articles, you should state clearly which articles you're using, so their authors can receive fair credit. It also occurred to me that, since the article Buddhism in India is in such a parlous state, we might want to merge History of Buddhism in India into that article.&mdash;Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 00:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You caught me writing a message for the same on the discussion page at that moment. I agree lets work it together, here are my thoughts again:
 * Shahis are distinguished by two phases, the Central Asian-Turkic Buddhist lineage and the Brahmin Hindu linegage later, lets make the distinction as it is relevant.
 * The Sunga, I know there are two camps, NPOV makes both camps included, and I have tried to include both camps. Note I mentioned that Sungas were seen as more symphathetic, some even called them Buddhist though I have to find the quotes for that. The persecution is based on oral tradition and a particular a historical source, which yes has been labelled exagerrated which is why I put that there, and why I made the section hint at a doubt over the Pusyamitras persecution.
 * The sections, I know we can make better arrangements, no real preference, I would just not throw two timelines one of military/political and the other social/idelogical but mix them together into a chronological progression since both facets worked in tandem at all times and not in isolation. This can always be worked out, and as the article develops maybe even a new one will come forth?
 * Consider the current form only an outline and the headings as stubs requiring fixing and filling up. Sounds good? I have refrained from adding or removing anything without bringing in sources, and that takes time so it's slow which is good because it gives others time to give imput as well.:)--Tigeroo 13:38, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Kindly see the "Decline of Buddhism in India" article. There is another editor who reverts to his version full of repititions and even styling errors. I tried to talk to him, accomadate him and even offered to compromise but he seems obdurate. Kindly protect the article till we talk it out and reach a version while experimenting in a sandbox instead of the article. Freedom skies 11:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi there, I did a minor tweak on the grammars and typos, but I am not seeing what the issue is. I have left a comment on the talk page asking to explain disputed reverts. The revert war is very sedate, so I don't think there is a need as yet. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 18th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Freedom skies
Your edit summary to Decline of Buddhism in India[]. What, exactly are you trying to say? I mean this literally. In addition, could you please a bit more civil? I do understand the word monstrosity here. Thank you. NinaEliza (talk • contribs • count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= logs ] • email ) 04:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Understood. However, you not only reverted Tigeroo's edits, but my edits and adminstrator's removal of a protection banner. I don't think that's the best way to go about things. NinaEliza (talk • contribs • count • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= logs ] • email ) 04:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

My revert
Freedom Skies,

I'm planning to revert your recent edits if you cannot explain why you removed two external links, and why you performed a reversion without a satisfactory explanation in the either the edit summary or on this talk page.

On a more general note, it's important that sources and quotes aren't "cherry-picked". I find it had to believe, for example that the current quote from Dr. Ambedkar is his complete view on the Decline of Buddhism in India. It's also important to not give any view undue weight, or obfuscate reality.


 * NinaEliza (talk • contribs • [ logs ] ) 10:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. NinaEliza (talk • contribs • [ logs ] ) 03:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Romila Thapar and Elst are opposites. Baka man  16:21, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * In as much as one is an acknowledged authority, and the other's a fringe theorist. Hornplease 12:04, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Self-acknowledged authority and her Marxist biases are like finding hay in a haystack. Baka man  18:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please, this adds nothing to your credibility, Bakasuprman. Freedom Skies, I apologise for cluttering up your talkpage. I trust you at least know the difference. Hornplease 19:01, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning
Please listen to Nina Lisa. Respond on my talk this is your  LAST WARNING  STOP WikiMan53 T/C edits Review Me! 04:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Took the liberty of striking the bogus warnings out. Baka man  16:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Freedom Skies
I'm sorry, but the debate going on over at History of Buddhism in India is way over my (current) head. More shamefully, I don't care much to research very thoroughly. My true areas of deep interest and/or knowledge lie elsewhere. I'm backing out the debate but I entreat you to be civil in both your editing and your comments at all times, in the interest of the article and Wikipedia itself.NinaEliza (talk • contribs • [ logs ] ) 21:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Some Advice regarding the conduct Nina reported on PAIN
Hello there, I come here in now in my function as a PAIN reviewer. I have reviewed the case Nina posted, and before you freak out, I'm not here to block you, or to warn you :) I do, however, have a few pieces of advice for the future:


 * Calling someone disruptive, is, in and of itself, disruptive. Everyone involved in this dispute is a respected contributor who volunteers his or her time to the betterment of the project.  If you feel someone is doing something wrong, don't just call them "wrong" or "disruptive", this only encourages conflict.  Instead, try to point out what they are doing wrong.  Then, if they are a legitimate editor, chances are they will try to change that.


 * Content isn't worth getting upset over. Really - it isn't.  We have 1,500,000 articles.  If one person keeps adding inaccuracies to an article - then leave a note on the talk page saying so.  If that explodes into a dispute, if you really want to keep disputing the matter, the best venue is the Mediation Cabal, rather than continuing to argue on the talk page.  Best to nip a problem in the bud, if it is going to be a problem.


 * When things fire up, consider disengaging for a while. The article in all likelihood will still be there when you come back.


 * Calling someone a liar over a content dispute is not very productive, if you feel they are mistaken please avoid calling them a liar, and instead, present the facts.

Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge  (  Talk to Me  &bull;  Neutrality Project  ) 21:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 00:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for December 26th.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Apologies
Freedom Skies,

I read over the article and the improvement in tone and copy are vast compared to the version I came to. Tigeroo's suggestion on the talk page is a good one. I'm glad I left - I obviously wasn't helping:).Nina Odell 17:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)aka NinaEliza

PS: I apologize for insulting your intelligence.Nina Odell 17:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

PPS: I also apologize in general for my arrogance and lack of good faith.Nina Odell 18:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Mediation
I just signed up as a mediator for Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-26 Decline of Buddhism in India. Would you accept me as a mediator? &mdash; Sebastian 08:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply - I have some questions there. &mdash; Sebastian 06:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Update: The requestor replied; I'm going to edit the case page. You may want to add the case page to your watchlist, if you haven't done so already. I also moved the talk on my page to User talk:SebastianHelm/Buddhism. &mdash; Sebastian 04:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

My Friend
Your suggestions and questions are very reasonable. I'll respond as I can:


 * You have seen the quality and the tone of the Yi Jin Jing and the "Bodhidharma, .." article Yes, they are very POV.  They were in queue for work, but I got sucked in here first.
 * The link is already there, in both the articles in question. Agreed.  And since BOTH articles are presenting "Two POVs, without interference from the other", we should include a "This topic is a matter of debate in the martial arts community, See also: XYZ" link on the top of both articles.  It helps the casual reader see that there are more versions on both sides.  (For an example of how this has helped in past POV arguments, please see the Medicine article.
 * The critisisms section exists only in the "Foreign influence ." article, the other article convieniently overlooks the conflicts present in the views of a minority of "armchair" historians. To be honest, it does appear as if the mass of scholarship tends to support your view. However, majority does not connote truth (Copernicus was one man...), and should not be presented as such.  Furthermore, we are in no real position (engineer and resident, even if we do both enjoy the martial arts) to determine who is an "armchair" historian or not.

If you find it reasonable, I will add the "See also" to the top of both articles, and try to clean up a few leading words from both articles (namely, replacing "majority" with "large number" and minority with "certain scholars." I think this reflects what you are trying to say without adding intonations of judgement.  Then we can put this POV issue behind us?

Best regards,

Djma12 21:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. And yes, Yi Jin Jing and the "Bodhidharma, .." are still next on my list for work. I have implemented the changes as discussed with you on the article. I have left a space under the "Opposing Theories" section for you to add any critique you have on these theories. I have also been in communication with people from the "Bodhidarma..." article and I think they may be amenable to me adding some criticisms to that article. If you wish to relay your concerns with that article to me, I'll see what I can do to make it less POV.

Djma12 01:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your support
Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 18:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you there?
If so, could you please take a look at the issue names in Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-26 Decline of Buddhism in India? I tried to give them names both parties can agree with. When I get your OK I will move the bulk of the table to the discussion page so we can discuss them more easily. &mdash; Sebastian 21:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Never mind. I just changed the issue names and moved them to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-26 Decline of Buddhism in India. &mdash; Sebastian 07:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Apologies
Many apologies for my outburst in one of the edit summaries on the Indus Valley Civilization page. It wasn't directed at anyone or any group. I was stressed and got frustrated. I hope you understand. Again, many apologies. Regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  22:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit war

 * ,

Was that necessary? We can not conduct a mediation while both parties are putting their energy into an edit war. I am especially surprised since you just put me off because you said you didn't have enough time. But you have time for such childish actions? Because yours was the original version, and because I am not convinced that it should be changed, I will revert to your version.

However, WP:3RR states: "Users may be blocked for edit warring or disruption even if they do not revert more than three times per day." Moreover, I should add a warning template here for repeatedly not including appropriate edit summaries.

As a sign of goodwill, I will be lenient for now. I am writing a similar message to the other party. &mdash; Sebastian 02:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

WT:HNB
Gizza</b><sup style="color:teal;">Chat  <b style="color:teal;">&#169;</b> 02:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Hinduism-related Collaboration of the week
You have been invited to help improve the article Sita Ram Goel in this weeks's Hinduism collaboration. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. See also these related articles. 

You can also vote for next's week collaboration at the project page: Hinduism-related Collaboration of the week. Unfortunately, the Collaboration site is little known, that's why the reminder. --Bondego 14:35, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

alex doss
Dude there was no South Indian "lemuria" and much of Alex Doss' stuff is Dravidian-cruft. I would expect this from Indrancroos but not from you. Baka man  00:20, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * His Tamil-atlantis myths could be researched but the conclusions are outlandish and many are blatantly false. Should Indrancroos come back they are anti-purpose. At least Kenny knows something about martial arts. Indrancroos on the other hand vandalized the page day and night. Be pragmatic with the references. Tamil naitonalist websites are highly suspect (and I am Tamil myself).  Baka man  02:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In comparison to Indrancroos, he does. Baka man  02:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Princess Diana Institute of Peace
Hi,

I kindly request you to have a look on the Princess Diana Institute of Peace whether the details I have submitted are meeting the criteria for citation. Thanks Rajsingam 11:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Oden RaveenS Bakasuprman SiobhanHansa Wackymacs User talk:Seraphimblade User talk:Freedom skies User talk:Rumpelstiltskin223 User talk:Dangerous-Boy User talk:Ccscott User talk:Dennisthe2 User talk:DoDoBirds User talk:Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas User talk:Tarinth

User talk:Djma12
Is that so, brother?Like you needed protection from Indrancroos? Refresh my memory: which editor warned you about Indrancroos while your allies were busy telling him "We're so glad you're here"? You're welcome, by the way. JFD 13:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Princess Diana Institute of Peace
Thanks a lot. But I have only off-line evidence. So I am planning to scan those few and bring into the main article with a different copyright license.Rajsingam 01:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

reverting other party's edits
Your reversion was legal, and it even reverted to the version I endorsed as a mediator. However, I would like to ask you to refrain from reversions while the mediation is going on. I believe it is crucial for a good solution that both parties build up trust, and I am afraid that such reversions undermine just that trust. There is no hurry; please wait till we reach a solution together!

I was thinking about reverting your deletion. I decided not to do so because
 * 1) I may not have been clear enough about my wish to abstain from reversions that interfere with the mediation;
 * 2) Tigeroo, too, did his reversion while the mediation was going on, and I didn't object back then. &mdash; Sebastian 19:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Foreign influences on Chinese martial arts
Hi Freedom skies, we can use the article's talk page for discussions. Shawnc 19:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It looks fine to me. Have a nice week. Shawnc 20:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Anton Balasingham
Hi,

The above personality did a lot for a lasting solution in the island though he suffered from diabetes, Motor Neurone Disease, a degenerative disease of the nervous system, and possibly medicine-induced bile duct cancer.

Now putting his Bio "Terrorist Tag", I feel unreasonable and removing it, please take necessary action on this.

I have discussed my points at Talk:Anton Balasingham.Rajsingam 09:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Civility & Good Faith
This is about the edit desc "Tigeroo misses the line which mentions the muslims, how convienient". I have taken the effort to explain myself in the edits, the talk page etc. Please do me the courtesy of explaining your own edits and issues a little more explicitly than a "not quite" or via snide remarks questioning my good faith otherwise we won't be able to get to a solution to improve the article. Focus on the material and the issue and things can be resolved easily instead of taking or making things a personal ego contest.--Tigeroo 13:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales Oden RaveenS Bakasuprman SiobhanHansa Wackymacs Seraphimblade Freedom skies Rumpelstiltskin223 Dangerous-Boy Ccscott Dennisthe2 DoDoBirds Mariano Anto Bruno Mascarenhas Tarinth

Your edits to Zen
Hello again FS. Could you take a look at my query on the Zen talk page? --MichaelMaggs 17:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, many thanks. Apologies for thinking that your revert was actually one of your own edits. --MichaelMaggs 19:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi
Hi Freedom skies,

Thanks for the message. I appreciate your efforts. By the way, have you checked your e-mail lately? : )

Wiki Raja 22:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism== ==

Deleting peoples comments from Talk pages is considered vandalism and definately not appreciated. I really think both of you need to take care of your problem privately.Peter Rehse 07:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

No sweat - thanks for the appologiesPeter Rehse 07:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)