User talk:Onkar Karambe

January 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits, such as the edit you made to Hinduism, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. ''Please stop your disruptive edits to HInduism. Your sources are unreliable, and you're trying a biased point of view which is not supported by mainstream scholarship.''  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Onkar Karambe, I am sorry to keep reverting your edits, but they are not cited to what we call reliable sources. Hindu Dharma (http://veda.wikidot.com/hinduism) is just a website. It is not what we call a reliable source. See WP:RS. The same is true for the PDF you are using. In addition, you present what is stated in these sources as the truth, ignoring what other sources say. This is contrary to WP:NPOV. I suggest that you read these policies and guidelines. Paul B (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

For your information: you've broken the 3RR rule: Please take care. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   16:27, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)

I wanna tell you that most things on hinduism are written by non-hindus. History of hindu word is greatly misunderstood.Hinduism is not fusion of aryan and dravidian. Because aryan invasion theory had been debunked by scientists. Then why you are showing wrong history about hinduism?

I am a hindu. Hinduism is called sanatana or vaidik dharma. This is well known fact. There are plenty of sites which states this. Isn't this reliable ?


 * No. They are a mere repetition of faith-perspectives. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which gives an overview of scholarly knowledge.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   08:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * First "aryan invasion theory" has not been "debunked by scientists". But even if it had been, it would make no difference to the statement about the "fusion of aryan and dravidian", since the difference between Aryan and Dravidian exists quite independently of any "invasion" by the former See Indo-Aryans and Dravidians. This indicates that there is such a basic confusion in your edits and your thinking that you need to look at some serious literature on the topic. Paul B (talk) 11:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Here are two useful online resources on Indian History:
 * University of Oslo, History of India, study course
 * NIOS, Historyof India - H4. The Vedic Age (1500BC-600BC)
 * The NIOS is an Indian organisation. Other chapters of this book can be found by changing the number in the adress. Best regards,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   12:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

April 2014
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Hinduism has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.


 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Hinduism was changed by Onkar Karambe (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.900977 on 2014-04-02T11:24:54+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 11:25, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Sanatana Dharma
Hi Onkar Karambe. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a faith manual. additions need WP:RS. Although Sivananda may be regarded as an authority within Hinduism, his book is not WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan  -  Let's talk!   11:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

What is WP:RS ?

May I know how his book is not reliable ?


 * Thanks for asking; very good. WP:RS is one of the so-called "policies" of Wikipedia: it's contents are to be based on reliable, secondary sources. Primary sources are sources written by involved people, like religious leaders; secondary spurces are sources written by uninvolved people, especially scholars. That seems strange, doesn't it? Someone like Sivananda is a learned religious leader, an authority in Hinduism; yet Wikipedia doesn't accept him? No, beacuse he's not a "neutral" writer; he's involved, and he's got a worldview to defend. Like "Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world". It's not - according to scholars. So, what do we do? Well, Wikipedia simply says: this particular website is based on scholarly sources, not on religious points of view. So, therefor, we don't accept Sivananda as a sources. at best you can write: "According to Sivananda, Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world" - but only if a secondary source says Sivananda says so. Otherwise, hundreds, if not thousands, of primary sources could be added.
 * This being said, a lot of people don't agree with Wikipedia's policies in regard to Hinduism. Have a look at Indra's Net (book), for example. Best regards,  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   12:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

But why don't you add vedic dharma with Sanatana dharma? There are so many books of Hindu religious leaders who refer Hindu dharma as Sanatana dharma or Vedic dharma. I request you to add vedic dharma words with Sanatana dharma


 * According to Julius Lipner, "Vaidika dharma" is rather a prescriptive (what it ought to be) than a descriptive (what it is) term. (Lipner (2012), "Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices", p.16).  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   16:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

July 2014
Your recent editing history at Hinduism shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Neil N  talk to me 04:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, if you missed my edit summary, Talk:Hinduism/Archive_29. --Neil N  talk to me 04:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I am not playing edit war. Someone did undo of existing data on 16 june without any reason. You accepted that but recovering the authentic lost data is not fair for you.


 * Senior editor did that edit by giving references. That is not my edit. I just recovered it. Onkar Karambe 06:11, 18 July 2014


 * This is your third attempt to introduce the term: 17-18 july 2014, 2 april 2014, 7 january 2014. In response to the first attempt the term "Sanatana Dharma" is being mentioned in the lead; no data is being lost. So please stop it now; your edits are WP:DISRUPTIVE.  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   04:15, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

The term Sanatana Dharma is different from vedic dharma. According to Harvey Andrew's 'teachings of Hindu mystics', Hinduism is identified traditionally as Sanatana Dharma.


 * And other authors say that some Hindus use this term, mainly ortodox and nationalistic Hindus. By the way, don't forget to sign your comments with ~ .  Joshua Jonathan   -  Let's talk!   04:42, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Not at all. Most of the hindus and many western scholars refer Hinduism as Sanatana Dharma. You have no any reason not to accept that. Sanatana Dharma is mentioned in scriptures. The term is not used only by nationalist and Orthodox people. Western authors too accept that. But you don't wanna accept. Because you don't want it. That's the only reason.

If I present Hindu scholars you don't accept. If I present western scholars, that too you don't accept. This is the reason why so many hindus are saying Wikipedia about religion is not authentic at all.

You have right to undo only if it is not authentic. Thanks.