User talk:Jharsika

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:


 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy editing!

-- Sango  123   (talk)  23:53, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Mona Lisa
Jharsika, could you please be a great deal more careful in the way that you word your edits, particularly when "breaking news".
 * 'In December 2010 it was discovered and confirmed with new magnification technologies that the Mona Lisa has tiny letters and numbers in her eyes. This discovery was described by The Daily Mail as "the real life Da Vinci Code." referenced as Pisa, Nick and Luke Salked. "The real-life Da Vinci Code: Historians discover tiny numbers and letters in the eyes of the Mona Lisa." The Daily Mail. December 13, 2010.

I don't know whwer you got "confirmed by new magnification techniques" from, but certainly not from the Daily Mail article that is cited.

The Daily Mail says "...only now discovered under magnification". This tells us that the "discovery" is new. It doesn't tell us that a new technique mmade the discovery possible and it certainly doesn't tell us that it is "confirmed".

What happened was that an enthusiast from the department of culture in Italy read an old novel that suggests that Leonardo put a lot of himself into the painting of Monna Lisa and gradually, as an "understanding" developed between them, the image increasingly reflected his own face and feelings. This theory has become more and more and more exaggerated on the internet, so that now the suggestion is made that the Mona Lisa is actually Leonardo in drag. The guy from the department of culture wants to dig up Leonardo and measure his skull to see if the faces match! How ludicrous!

The same novel said there are "mysteries/secrets" (depending on the translation) in her eyes. So this guy took a magnifying glass, and among all the minute brushstrokes and tiny cracks and layers of varnish found some marks that resemble an L or (quote) "maybe a 7" and a V in one eye and several more things that could be letters (but he is not sure which) in the other eye.

Nothing is "confirmed". Nothing has been done with "new technology". This news will be "comfirmed" when high res. photos are presented to the public, and are shown clear enough that it doesn't take a good deal of imagination to find the letters.

I guarrantee that if I examined the brushstrokes of Monet's huge "Waterlilies" in the Orangerie with a magnifying glass, I could read the whole of Psalm 23 in Icelandic Runes, if that was what I happened to be looking for.

Amandajm (talk) 00:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)